To Teresa Ribera Spanish minister for the ecological transition and the demographic challenge &

Permanent Representatives of the member States of the Council of Europe

To the President of the European Commission & the College of Commissioners

via email

Dear President Metsola and Members of the ITRE Committee,

Dear Minister Ribera and Permanent Representatives of the member States of the Council of Europe,

Dear President von der Leyen and Commissioners,

The signatories of this letter are grassroots and civil society organizations, movements, recognized Indigenous Peoples in the European Union and beyond, local community groups, academics and experts. We have direct experience in assessing the true and often hidden costs of mining including its impacts on people, the environment, good governance and the rule of law.

Due to the serious shortcomings outlined below, we request the withdrawal of the Critical Raw Materials Act (CRMA). We reject the misleading policies at its base including its failure to understand the implications of corruption, the absence of communities’ Right to Say ‘No’ and of rights of nature as well as its legitimisation and support of manipulative “social acceptance” and mining certification schemes that breach fundamental citizens’ rights and research ethics.

Instead we demand environmental and climate policies that reduce raw materials demand, energy use and  faulty land management schemes. Increasing mining by breaching fundamental rights, even for the ‘environment’ or to ‘mitigate climate change’, will only worsen climate and ecological conditions and social conflict.

The Act does not address corruption, which is known to be endemic to mining

Across the world, undue influence of mining led to an erosion of the quality of governance; spreading corruption and accentuating local power asymmetries. Governments wrongly merge the interests of mining corporations with those of the general public. Meanwhile this forfeits real mitigation pathways for climate change and the environment.

The recent news in Portugal, where  several companies, high-ranking politicians, and public entities are being investigated for alleged corruption related to the attribution of two lithium concessions, led to the resignation of the Prime Minister António Costa. Savannah Resources and Lusorecursos, the owners of the two concessions, will no longer participate in the Raw Materials Week 2023 (RMW).^[i] The investigation has brought political uncertainty and instability to the country and illustrates that Europe is not immune to the all too present connection between mining and corruption. This is not an exception – across the EU there exist countless cases of corruption and misconduct related to mining, even if they have rarely been brought to justice or received due public attention.^[ii]

Purporting mining as a ‘climate solution’ and mining companies as ‘climate champions’, the CRMA will waterdown laws, fast track procedures and inject billions of taxpayers euros into speculative and reckless mining. For so-called ‘strategic’ raw materials (copper, lithium, nickel etc.), the CRMA foresees fast permitting by limiting public consultation periods and shortening the time citizens have for a fair trial to defend their rights.

This runs against human and environmental rights such as the right to public participation in decision making on environmental matters and the right to access justice. Other fundamental rights, including the right to housing, are breached in areas where new mines involve forced evictions, while eroding our food sovereignty and the rights of farmers, peasants and other people working in rural areas.

The CRMA will not only extend bad governance across Europe, but exacerbate it globally by allowing the designation of strategic projects outside of the EU, including on Indigenous lands. EU institutions have refused to modify the CRMA^[iii] to include legally binding Free Prior and Informed Consent mechanisms. This is in breach of international conventions on Indigenous Rights. The Sámi people of the Sápmi region in Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Russia are recognized Indigenous Peoples in the European Union, and mining causes irreparable damage to their way of life.^[iv] We need regulations that offer legally binding protection to Indigenous Nations and legalize the Right to Say ‘No’. We do not need tokenistic advisory roles for communities impacted by mining inside and outside the EU’s borders. 

A “Social license” to harm, destroy and violate European fundamental rights and ethics

There is nothing socially acceptable about the scramble for raw materials. Many of us are directly affected by environmental and social non-compliance of the extractive sector. We have never given any company the permission to extract or explore in our communities or to transform our lands into sacrifice zones in the name of perpetual economic growth.

We reject policy proposals that seek to manage resistance through “facilitat[ing] public acceptance” (CRMA) or by industry-coined procedures to gain a social license to operate (SLO). If not backed by Free, Prior and Informed Consent dialogue at community level, we consider “social licensing” and any related influence on public perceptions by public authorities or corporations, a procedural euphemism for social engineering and ‘soft’ counter-insurgency. They only serve to brush off legitimate objections to instances of corruption, or projects that fail to comply with environmental and labor laws. A subgroup on public acceptance that is part of the CRMA’s Critical Raw Materials Board is insufficient. It does not resolve the violation of citizens’ rights impacted by Strategic Projects.

The Commission’s goal of “[c]hanging public opposition to passive tolerance or active support” runs against European ideals of democratic participation.^[v] It will erode the public’s trust in the European project by diminishing efforts made toward a just and sustainable future for all. We refuse a law that promotes passive tolerance to socio-environmental harm, corruption and labor abuse, which existing public funding schemes are already reinforcing. The Horizon 2020 (2014-2020) and Horizon Europe (2021-2027) programmes contain at least 25 projects with a total budget of €181M which include deliverables that seek to organize public acceptance for extractive projects in member states and beyond.^[vi] These misleading publicly funded initiatives refuse scrutiny by the very public they intend to influence. There is a need for an inquiry into the Commission’s research requirement to “impact[ing] public awareness and acceptance and trust in mining operation.”^[vii] The signatories of this letter consider the Commission’s funding and the participation of public authorities’ in such applied research an illicit interference on the opinion of individuals, and a violation of article 11, section 1, of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (CFR) and article 10, section 1, of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Furthermore, the ethics management and board of at least one Horizon Europe project does not fulfill the ethical standards set out for the Horizon Europe Framework Programme.^[viii] Thus, the signatories ask the Commission for an independent assessment of the 25 projects.

The EU invested millions of taxpayer euros into research on how to generate “social acceptability” for mining operations, some of which proved to be involved in criminal activities. For example, in 2016 three executives from the Cobre Las Cruces copper mine in Spain were sentenced to a year in prison and fined 293,000 euro for environmental crimes after polluting Seville’s aquifer with arsenic.^[ix] Since then the company has been repeatedly fined for damages to water bodies, yet it was awarded a 26,7 million euro subsidy and has benefited from half a dozen Research Projects under the Framework Programmes worth millions of euros.^[x]

Social acceptability efforts violate democratic regulations and due process. They generate misinformation, and obstruct transparency. They hinder the possibility of legal action against non-compliance with environmental, administrative or labor laws. And social acceptability efforts advance corruption.

Europe’s mining regulations are dangerously obsolete

With statements such as mining “in the EU is subject to the highest environmental and social standards worldwide,”^[xi] EU institutions like to assure citizens that its mining legislation is the most advanced in the world. This is false.

Tailing dams illegal in Brazil, Chile, China, Ecuador or Peru are being advanced as ‘best available techniques’ in Spain and Portugal.^[xii] For example, the Touro copper proposal in Spain plans an 81-meter-high dam just 200 meters upstream from the village of Arinteiro. While Brazil and Ecuador prohibit tailing dams less than 10 km upstream from potentially affected communities and China prohibits them at a distance of less than 1 km, EU legislation imposes no restrictions. In Spain, 99% of tailings dams are built following upstream design,^[xiii] the most dangerous construction method – banned in Brazil, Chile, Ecuador or Peru.

Industry-driven negligence combined with policy makers’ misjudgement of mining operations leads to  obsolete regulations and a reluctance to implement ‘Best Available Technologies’ (BAT). This is extremely dangerous. This even more so as new ‘low-cost’ mining projects seek to develop large mines with lower ore grades to mine conventional metal (e.g. copper) as well as minerals such as lithium. They will create waste facilities of unseen dimensions that in return come with significant risks. Mining lower ore grades doubled the last decade, while costs and quantities of mining waste increased exponentially.^[xiv]

Europe has seen too many major mine accidents.^[xv] “Never again,” said Margot Wallström, the EU Commissioner after the Baia Mare tailing dam failure. Yet the sheer scope and pace of new mines, plus the untested nature of the accelerated permitting regime can only lead to accidents. For example, the recently approved extension of the Rio Tinto tailings dam in western Andalucia,  Spain, allows the storage of over 360 million tons of highly toxic sludge. In comparison, the 1998 Aznalcóllar disaster involved the release of ‘only’ 6 million tons. We refuse to accept a law that we know will give rise to more accidents with incalculable consequences in terms of human lives and environmental damage.

We can’t mine our way out of a perpetual growth syndrome

European policymakers have bought into the delusion that more mining will mitigate ecological and climate catastrophe. Europe’s target is to mine in the next 30 years as much copper as has been mined in the past 7,000 years.^[xvi] It is to completely deplete known global reserves for nickel, cobalt, lithium and other minerals (under the premise that reserves will continue to expand indefinitely via deep-sea and space mining). Scientific consensus against deep sea mining has also shown the irreversible damage to ecosystems, potential toxic releases, biodiversity loss, and the unknown consequences on ocean health.^[xvii]

Yet, as ore grades dwindle^[xviii] (for example, average grades in copper mines has gone from 1.8% in 1930 to 0.5% today), newly proposed mines create greater environmental impacts^[xix], larger volumes of waste, larger energy demand and rising emissions, under the constraints of minimum low-cost safety standards. That is the opposite of ‘green.’

To meet Europe’s target, its mineral demand forecasts are enormous: For solar and wind technologies demand for lithium, dysprosium, cobalt, and neodymium are to be up to 600% in 2030 and up to 1500% in 2050 from 2018 levels. Batteries for electric vehicles and renewables will drive 2030 demand for lithium up by 1800% and cobalt by 500%, and drive 2050 demand up by almost 6000% and 1500%, respectively.^[xx] These numbers do not take into account so-called ‘smart technologies,´other individualized electric mobility devices (e.g. scooters, bikes, etc.), energy infrastructure (transformers, HVPLs, etc.) and, in the end, relies on significant data gaps.^[xxi]

According to Simon P. Michaux, of the Finnish Geological Survey (GTK) “a case can be made that not only is current mineral production not high enough to supply the projected quantity demand for metals, but current global reserves are not large enough to meet long term consumption targets.”^[xxii] All this happens alongside new additions of low-carbon energy sources which are being built alongside already existing fossil fuel and nuclear energy sources on the European energy grid. European environmental policy, moreover, is furthering energy market privatization and entrenching the existing trajectory of uncontrollable energy consumption.^[xxiii]European environmental and climate policy is deeply flawed and leading to worsening ecological conditions. We need legal reforms based on energy and material reduction, not a law that feeds into the hands of the mining lobby. 

EU treaties require that all EU decisions are taken as openly and as closely to the citizens as possible. The CRMA was intended “to collect evidence and views from a broad range of stakeholders and citizens.” But given that it was rushed through at great speed by DG GROW, the documents put to public consultation were only available in French, German, and English languages, excluding significant segments of Europe’s population.^[xxiv] This is a violation of our right to access to information and to participate in decision making in environmental matters enshrined by the Aarhus Convention to which the European Union is a signatory. We will take all legal steps to ensure redress because with the CRMA, EU institutions have again put the cart before the horse.^[xxv] We refuse another law that wants short term profit to the detriment of people and the planet. It is for all these legal and ethical violations that we request the withdrawal of the Critical Raw Materials Act (CRMA).

We look forward to reading your reply and remain

Yours sincerely,

Grupo de Geopolítica y Bienes Comunes, Buenos Aires, Argentina

“EcoLur” Informational NGO, Yerevan, Armenia

Armenian Environmental Front

Right Side Human Rights Defender NGO, Yerevan Armenia

Attac Austria, Austria

Degrowth Vienna, Austria

CATAPA vzw, Ghent, Belgium

Center for Civil Society Promotion/ Centar za promociju civilnog društva, Bosnia

Eko BiH network, BiH

Eko Forum Zenica, Bosnia 

Ekološko udruženje “OZRENSKI STUDENAC” Sočkovac

Centar za životnu sredinu/Center for Environment, Bosnia

Udruženje “Centar za mirovno obrazovanje” / Center for Peace Education, Bosnia 

Green Team, Bosnia 

NGG Park Prirode Trstionica i Boriva, Kakanj, Bosnia 

Udruženje građana Fojničani Maglaj, Bosnia 

Foundation Atelier for Community Transformation – ACT/ Fondacija Atelje za društvene promjene – ACT, Bosnia 

NGG “Stop izgradnji MHE na Kasindolskoj rijeci” Bosnia

Observatorio Plurinacional de Salares Andinos, Chile

Fundación Tantí, Chile

Fundación Chile Sin Ecocidio, Chile

Fundación Protege Los Molles, Chile

Tasaarengu Eesti Organisatsioon, Estonia

WeMove Europe, Europe

GEN Europe, Europe

Saimaa ilman kaivoksia ry, Finland

Ei kaivoksia Suomen käsivarteen ry, Finland

Ei kaivosta Pyhä-Luostolle, Finland

Kansalaisten kaivosvaltuuskunta – MiningWatch Finland ry, Finland

Kaivoskriittinen kansanliike, Finland

Sokli erämaana ry, Finland

Sompion Luonnonystävät ry (The Finnish Association for Nature Conservation – local association for Savukoski-Sodankylä areas), Finland

Ylitornion – Pellon Luonto ry (local group of The Finnish Association for Nature Conservation), Finland

Vuohču Sámiid Searvi rs, Finland

Osikonmäen kyläyhdistys ry, Finland

Kolkontaipaleen kyläyhdistys ry, Finland

The Global Extractivisms and Alternatives Initiative (EXALT), Finland

Sámi Bálgosat rs (Association of Saami Reindeer Herding Co-operatives), Finland

Rajat Lapin Kaivoksille ry (Limits to Mines in Lapland Registered Association), Finland

Ass. Risteco – La Ville qui Mange, France

Association of Ethical Shareholders Germany

Hellenic Mining Watch, Greece

Observatorio de Industrias Extractivas (OIEGT), Guatemala

aHang Platform, Hungary

Védegylet Egyesület/Protect the Future Association, Hungary

Clean Air Action Group, Hungary

Ökotárs-Hungarian Environmental Partnership Foundation, Hungary

International University College of Turin, Italy

Justice Peace and Integrity of Creation Commission Union of Superiors General and International Union of Superiors General, Italy
Associação Cultural Amigos da Serra da Estrela – ASE, Central Region, Portugal
Associação Montalegre Com Vida, North Region, Portugal

Centro de Ecologia, Recuperação e Vigilância de Animais Selvagens (CERVAS) / Associação ALDEIA, Central Region, Portugal

Movimento Seixoso-Vieiros: Lítio Não, North Region, Portugal

UDCB – Unidos em Defesa de Covas do Barroso, North Region, Portugal

Espaço A SACHOLA – Covas do Barroso, North Region, Portugal

Rede Minas Não, Portugal

Extinction Rebellion Guimarães, North Region, Portugal

Chaves Comunitária, North Region, Portugal

Grupo de Investigação Territorial (GIT), Portugal

Associação Povo e Natureza do Barroso – PNB, North Region, Portugal

AVE – Associação Vimaranense para a Ecologia, North Region, Portugal

Movimento SOS Serra d’Arga, North Region, Portugal

Movimento Contra Mineração Penalva do Castelo, Mangualde e Satão, Central Region, Portugal

Rede para o Decrescimento em Portugal, Portugal

SOS – Serra da Cabreira, North Region, Portugal

IRIS, Associação Nacional de Ambiente, Portugal

Sciaena – Oceano # Conservação # Sensibilização, Portugal

Movimento Não às Minas – Montalegre, North Region, Portugal

Movimento ContraMineração Beira Serra, Central Region, Portugal

Movimento Amarante diz não à exploração de lítio Seixoso-Vieiros, North Region, Portugal

FAPAS – Associação Portuguesa para a Conservação da Biodiversidade, Portugal

Grupo pela Preservação da Serra da Argemela (GPSA), Centro Region, Portugal

URZE – Associação Florestal da Encosta da Serra da Estrela, Portugal

Bravo Mundo – Citizens Movement for a Safer Future, Central Region, Portugal

Nao as Minas Beiras – Citizens Movement, Central Region, Portugal

MiningWatch Portugal, Portugal

Asociația pentru protejarea Munților Apuseni-Rovina, Vest Region, România

Independent Centre for the Development of Environmental Resources, Vest Region, Romania

Ecou Rovina Bucureșci, București – Ilfov Region, România

Mining Watch Romania, Romania

Roșia Montană Community, Centru Region, România

Cărturești Foundation, Bucharest, România

Street Delivery, Romania

Comunitatea Declic, România

Asociatia turistica sportiva civica si ecologista “Clubul de Cicloturism NAPOCA” (CCN) – România

Asociația HaicuBicla, București, România

Acción Océanos, Spain

Alconchel sin Minas, Extremadura, Spain

Amigos de la Tierra, Spain

Asociación Alarma Terra de Montes, Galicia, Spain

Asociación Cultural Valle el Saltador, Andalucía, Spain

Asociación de Defensa Ambiental Salvemos Cabana, Galicia, Spain

Asociación Tralapena, Galicia, Spain

Campiña Sur sin Megaminas, Extremadura, Spain

Ecologistas en Acción, Spain

Fundação Montescola, Galicia, Spain

No a la mina de Gilico, Murcia, Spain

No a la mina en la Sierra de Yemas, Castilla y León, Spain

Plataforma Bierzo Aire Limpio, Castilla y León, Spain

Plataforma Cívica Alcalaboza Viva, Andalucía, Spain

Plataforma Comarca de Olivenza sin Minas, Extremadura, Spain

Plataforma en Defensa da Ría de Muros e Noia – PLADEMAR, Spain

Plataforma Mina Touro – O Pino Non, Galicia, Spain

Plataforma de afectados por la minería de Teruel, Aragón, Spain

Plataforma de Afectados por Metales Pesados de la Sierra Minera, Murcia, Spain

Plataforma de afectados por las explotaciones mineras de Peña Zafra, Balonga y Quibas, Murcia, Spain

Plataforma No a la Mina de Cañaveral, Extremadura, Spain

Plataforma No a la Mina en el Valle del Corneja, Castilla y León, Spain

Plataforma Oro No, Principado de Asturias, Spain

Plataforma para la defensa del Valle de Lucainena, Andalucía, Spain

Plataforma Rural Sostenible, Castilla y León, Spain

Plataforma Salvemos Esparteros, Andalucía, Spain

Plataforma Salvemos la Montaña de Cáceres, Extremadura, Spain

Plataforma Salvemos las Villuercas, Cáceres, Spain

Plataforma Sí a la Tierra Viva, Castilla-La Mancha, Spain

Sierra de Gata Viva, Cáceres, Spain

Sindicato Labrego Galego, Galicia, Spain

SOS Suído-Seixo, Galicia, Spain

Marš sa Drine, Serbia

Udruženje za zaštitu životne sredine (AEP), Serbia

Mlavska vojska, Petrovac na Mlavi, Serbia

Čuvari Homolja, Žagubica, Serbia

Pokret Odbranimo šume Fruške gore, Fruška Gora, Serbia

Udruženje za zaštitu šuma, Novi Sad, Serbia

Ne dam, Ne dau, Majdanpek, Serbia

Borani se pitaju, Bor, Serbia

Extinction rebellion Srbija, Serbia

Kreni-Promeni, Serbia

PRVI PRVI NA SKALI, Kragujevac, Serbia

Earth Thrive Serbia/UK

Polekol, Serbia

Bravo! Novi Sad, Serbia

Kremnica nad zlato, Kremnica beyond gold, Slovakia

Urán Košice STOP, Slovakia

Društvo Sončni grič, Slovenia

Skiftet, Sweden

Kazdagi Association for The Protection of Natural and Cultural Assets, Türkiye

Climate Justice Coalition, Türkiye

Kazma Birak Campaign Coordination Committee, Türkiye

En Ecocide, Türkiye

Ukrainian Nature Conservation Group, Ukraine

Free Svydovets, Ukraine

The Corner House, United Kingdom

Fuel Poverty Action, United Kingdom

Socal Friends the World Social Forum, USA

Urgent Action Fund for Feminist Activism, USA

Prof. Bram Büscher, Wageningen University, Netherlands

Prof. dr Biljana Stojković, Faculty of Biology, Univerzitet u Beogradu, Belgrade, Serbia

Prof. dr Ljiljana Tomović, Faculty of Biology,, Univerzitet u Beogradu, Belgrade, Serbia

Prof. Dr. Bogdan Šolaja, Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts, Belgrade, Serbia

Prof. Dr. Branimir Grgur, Faculty of Technology and Metallurgy University of Belgrade, Serbia

Prof. Dr. Giuseppe Mastruzzo, International University College of Turin, Italy

Prof. Dr. Lidija Djokic, University of Belgrade, Serbia

Prof. Dr. Miomir Kostic, University of Belgrade, Serbia (retired)

Prof. Dr. Ratko Ristić, University of Belgrade, Serbia

Prof. Filipe Calvão, Geneva Graduate Institute, Switzerland

Prof. Giuseppe Mastruzzo, International University College of Torino, Itália

Prof. Maja van der Velden, University of Oslo, Norway

Prof. Markus Kröger, University of Helsinki, Finland

Prof. Maya van der Velden,Universidade de Oslo, Norway

Prof. Ugo Mattei, University of Turin, Italy

Prof. Zoran Radovanović, Faculty of Medicine, Belgrade, Serbia (retired)

Prof. Christopher Chase-Dunn,  Distinguished Professor of the Graduate Division, University of California-Riverside, USA

Dr. Magdalena Taube, Macromedia University Berlin; co-founder, Berliner Gazette, Germany

Prof. Ana Vitória Alkmim, Interdisciplinary Centre of Social Sciences (CICS.NOVA), Lisbon, Portugal

Dr. (Agr. For. Sci.) Helvi Heinonen-Tanski, Finland

Dr. Adrian Lahoud, Royal College of Art, London, United Kingdom

Dr. Al Gedicks, University of Wisconsin-La Crosse, Wisconsin, USA

Dr. Alevgul H. Sorman, Basque Centre for Climate Change (BC3), Spain

Dr. Alexander Dunlap, Boston University, USA & University of Helsinki, Finland

Dr. Alison Laurie Neilson, Interdisciplinary Centre for Social Sciences, NOVA University, Lisbon, Portugal

Dr. Astrid Ulloa, Universidad Nacional de Colombia

Dr. Carlos Tornel, Independent Scholar, México

Dr. Claudio Cattaneo, Masaryk University, Brno

Dr. Diego Andreucci, University of Barcelona, Spain

Dr. Dragana Đorđević, ICT Metallurgy -, University of Belgrade, Serbia

Dr. Dražen B. Zimonjić, Member, Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts, Belgrade, Serbia

Dr. Ecehan Balta, Independent Researcher, Turkey

Dr. Elliot Honeybun-Arnolda, University of East Anglia, United Kingdom

Dr. Eric Bettis, Wayne State University, United States

Dr. Filip Alexandrescu, Research Institute for Quality of Life, Romania

Dr. Filka Sekulova, Universitat Oberta de Catalunya, Spain

Dr. Gabriel Girigan, “Lucian Blaga” University of Sibiu, România

Dr. Godofredo Pereira, Royal College of Art, London, United Kingdom

Dr. Gustavo García-López, Center for Social Studies, University of Coimbra, Portugal

Dr. Hanne Cottyn, Ghent University, Belgium

Dr. Hannu L. Suominen, Marine Microbiologist, Finland

Dr. Hans Eickhoff, Interdisciplinary Centre of Social Sciences (CICS.NOVA), Lisbon, Portugal

Dr. Ioana Bunescu, “Lucian Blaga” University of Sibiu, Romania

Dr. Irina Velicu, Center for Social Studies, University of Coimbra, Portugal

Dr. Jari Natunen, PhD Biochemistry, chair of MiningWatch Finland

Dr. Jean Leon Boucher, Senior Researcher, The James Hutton Institute, Scotland

Dr. Joám Evans, Åbo Akademi University, Finland

Dr. Jonas Van Vossole, Ecology and Society Lab, Center for Social Studies, Coimbra University, Portugal

Dr. Jonathan Kishen Gamu, University of Sheffield, United Kingdom

Dr. Ksenija Hanacek, Autonomous University of Barcelona, Spain & University of Helsinki, Finland

Dr. Louise Guibrunet, National Autonomous University of Mexico, Mexico

Dr. Maarit Laihonen, University of Eastern Finland, Finland

Dr. Marcin Zaród, SWPS University Warsaw, Poland

Dr. Maria Elena Indelicato, Center for Social Studies, University of Coimbra, Portugal

Dr. Mariana Walter, UAB, Spain

Dr. Marianne Juntunen, PhD Biochemistry,  MSc Tech, Finland

Dr. Mark Levene, Emeritus fellow, University of Southampton, United Kingdom.

Dr. Marta Conde, Autonomous University of Barcelona, Spain

Dr. Mike Hannis, Bath Spa University, United Kingdom

Dr. Nenad M. Kostić, retired professor at Iowa State University &  TAMUC-Commerce, USA

Dr. Paul Hodge, University of Newcastle, Australia

Dr. Paula Sequeiros, Centre for Social Studies, University of Coimbra, Portugal

Dr. Renata Pacheco, University of Lisbon, Portugal.

Dr. Roberto Cantoni, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain

Dr. Sheila Holz, Center for Social Studies, University of Coimbra, Portugal

Dr. Silvia Maeso, Centre for Social Studies, University of Coimbra, Portugal

Dr. Stefania Barca, University of Santiago de Compostela, Spain

Dr. Steven H. Emerman, Malach Consulting, USA

Dr. Susanna Myllylä, Associate Professor, University of Eastern Finland, Finland

Dr. Susanne Hofmann, Visiting Fellow, London School of Economics, United Kingdom

Dr. Tarja Richard, Director for Managing Authority, Finland

Dr. Valer Simion Cosma, ”Lucian Blaga” University of Sibiu, România

Dr. Laura Calvet Mir, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain.

Dr. Beyza Üstün, Turkey

Dr. Will Lock, University of Sussex, United Kingdom

Dr. Johannes M. Waldmüller, University of Vienna and Climate Change Advisor, Brot für die Welt/Diakonie Austria

Dr. José María Vallet García, Finnish Geospatial Research Institute, National Land Survey of Finland

Alessandro Morosin, Assistant Professor of Sociology & Criminology, University of La Verne California, USA

Dr Svjetlana Nedimović, editor, Riječ i djelo, Bosnia and Herzegovina

Laura Calvet-Mir, PhD, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain.

Irina Castro, Centre for Social Studies, Portugal

Josephine Becker, Researcher, Universidade de Vigo, Spain

V’cenza Cirefice, PhD researcher, Geography Department, University of Galway, Ireland

Krystian Woznicki, author, editor, co-founder, Berliner Gazette, Germany

Joana Sousa, PhD, researcher, Centre for Social Studies, Univ Coimbra, Portugal 

Joao Prates Ruivo, Associate Lecturer in Environmental Architecture, Royal College of Art, UK

Isabel Ferreira, PhD, researcher, Centre for Social Studies, University of Coimbra, Portugal 

Lúcia Fernandes, PhD, researcher, Centre for Social Studies, University of Coimbra, ««Portugal 

Antonio del Giudice, Associate Lecturer, School of Architecture, Royal College of Art, UK

Pablo Dominguez, Senior Researcher at the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, France.

PD Dr. Heike Hübener, University Gießen, Germany

Professor John Barry, Queen’s University Belfast

Professor Vesa Puuronen, University of Oulu, Finland

André Pereira, PhD candidate, University of Lisbon, Portugal

Caroline Seagle, PhD Candidate, Department of Anthropology, McGill University, Montreal, Canada

Ciarán Ó Briain, Independent Scholar / PhD Candidate, Ireland

Cristiano Pereira, PhD Candidate, ISCTE-IUL, Portugal

Elena Gálvez, PhD Candidate, University of Coimbra, Portugal

Ernesto Deus, PhD.,Centre for Social Studies, University of Coimbra, Portugal

Federico Demaria, Associate Professor in ecological economics, University of Barcelona, Spain

Guilherme Castelbranco de Guimarães Serôdio, ISCTE-IUL, Portugal

Helena Sabino Antunes, PhD Candidate, Universidade de Salamanca, Spain

Hestia Delibas, PhD candidate, Center for Social Studies, University of Coimbra, Portugal

İlksen Dincer Bas, End Ecocide Türkiye, Türkiye

Ioana Savin, postdoc researcher, Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu

Jesse Segura, PhD candidate, University Autonoma de Barcelona, Spain

Joana Sá Couto, PhD Candidate, University of Lisbon, Portugal.

Kaya Schwemmlein, PhD candidate, University of Lisbon, Portugal

Line Algoed, PhD Researcher, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium

M.Sc. Geotechnical Engineer, Peter W. Brandt, Finland

Maria João Horta Parreira, CICS.NOVA, FCSH-NOVA, Portugal

Mariana Riquito, PhD Candidate in Social Studies, University of Amsterdam, Netherlands

Michiel Köhne, Wageningen University, Netherlands

Mikuláš Černík, PhD candidate, Department of Environmental Studies, Masaryk University, Cz Rep

MSc Chemical Engineering, Leif Ramm-Schmidt, Finland

Niina Helistö, Surveyor, former mine supervisor, founder of Rajat Lapin kaivoksille ry, Finland

Pedro Fidalgo, PhD Candidate, Centre for Social Studies University of Coimbra, Portugal

Ramón Balcázar Morales, PhD Candidate in Rural Development, UAM Mexico

Rodolfo Pezzi, PhD candidate, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland

Ruta Śpiewak, Assistant Professor, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland

Tiago Patatas, PhD Candidate in Architecture Research, Royal College of Art, United Kingdo

Vera Ferreira, PhD Candidate, University of Lisbon, Portugal

Constantina Theodorou, architect- PhD candidate NTUA, Greece

Giorgio Pirina, researcher, Ca’ Foscari University of Venice, Italy

Giada Coleandro, PhD candidate, University of Bologna

Luca Onesti, PHD candidate, University of Lisbon, Portugal 

Rubén Vezzoni, Doctoral Reseacher, University of Helsinki, Finland

Christina Pinell, M.Sc. (Tech), Finnish Geospatial Research Institute, National Land Survey of Finland.

ENDNOTES

^[i] Information supplied by DG GROW 09-11-2023. Already in a 2020 complaint statement on the Horizon 2020 project MIREU, the signatory “Não às Minas Montalegre” from Portugal had informed Commission’s DG GROW on the questionable business practices of Lusorecursos. With the recent corruption scandal in Portugal, the company was, including their facilitators Iberian Sustainable Mining Cluster (ISMC) and Cluster Portugal Mineral Resources (ACPMR), excluded from the Horizon Europe funding application “Li4Life”. Despite the Portuguese Public Prosecutors search warrant equally targeting the directors of the mining authority DGEG  on the grounds of “illegitimate benefits” for the involved companies, the Commission upholds its participation in the RMW.

^[ii] Examples include the 2018 Borba tragedy in Portugal, with 5 casualties, the arrest of public officials in connection to the Orivesi mine owned by Dragon Mining in Finland, or the ongoing prosecution of 16 mining officials in connection with the reopening of the Aznalcóllar mine in Spain. In Spain alone, the Iberian Mining Observatory (www.minob.org) has documented more than 30 cases of corruption and administrative misconduct connected to mines while the European Commission itself is facing an ongoing investigation by the European Ombudsman on the use of Horizon funds in the illegal operation of the San Finx mine.

^[iii] EEB https://eeb.org/critical-raw-materials-regulation-vote/

^[iv] Contrary to Norway, Germany, Spain, Luxembourg, Netherlands, and Denmark, no host member state has so far ratified the Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention (ILO 169). As part of the letter’s signatories the Sámi stress: the loss of lands impact reindeer herding, local economy, Sámi culture, health, and well-being. Sámi traditions and culture will vanish if reindeer herding disappears. The European project steered by the Commission must recognize and protect the rights of the indigenous Sámi people to their lands that they have traditionally owned, occupied, and used, including those to which they have had access for their subsistence and traditional activities.

^[v] European Commission’s 3rd EU Raw Materials Scoreboard

^[vi] AGEMERA, BIORECOVER, CROCODILE, ENICON, EXCEED, GREENPEG, illuMINEation, INFACT, ION4RAW, ISAAC, MADITRACE, MIREU, NEMO, NEXT, PACIFIC, RAWMINA, RIA CICERO, S34I, SecREEts, SEMACRET, SOLCRIMET, SUMEX, TARANTULA, VAMOS, VECTOR; references at https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1BKz2hMNSg1gwApu5D27u0Inv0mbE-yhWGMPphG3eyVc/edit?usp=sharing

^[vii] Of the 25 research consortia in question, 15 have, backed by the Commission’s managing agencies ERC-EA, EASME, and HaDEA, refused to make their Grant Agreements, and parts on how they intend to shape the public’s perception, available to interested civil society actors, invoking “commercial secrets” and “intellectual property” that allegedly outweigh the public’s interest (AGEMERA, BIORECOVER, EXCEED, GREENPEG, illuMINEation, MIREU, NEMO, NEXT, RAWMINA, SecREEts SEMACRET, SOLCRIMET, SUMEX, TARANTULA,VECTOR). // EASME Head of Raw Materials Sector Marcin Sadowski at the “Social Acceptance in the Raw Material Sector” workshop 2018: “projects funded under Horizon 2020 are expected to address […] impacting public awareness and acceptance and trust in mining operation.” // HaDEA project advisor Véronique Woulé Ebongué at Raw Materials Week 2019: “actions responding to 2018-2020 calls are requested to […] improve public awareness, acceptance and trust’.”

^[viii] For the Horizon Europe project VECTOR allegations including negligence of, are: local ethics evaluation, research, and good participatory practice with feedback given in the project’s host countries (Germany, Serbia, Ireland), as recommended by the mitigation requirements of the Global Code of Conduct for Research in Resource-Poor Settings (see §1, §2, §3, §4, §8, §9, §10). At least in Serbia, §21 was violated through a VECTOR member not disclosing the intent and scope of contacts made with local communities. The use of machine learning to identify favorable areas for extractive activities in Europe and the non-involvement of human rights experts and independent advisors may be in violation of the Guidance note on Potential misuse of research, as VECTOR’s activities involve minority and vulnerable groups and it develops social and behavioral profiling technologies that could be misused to stigmatize, discriminate against, harass or intimidate people. Last but not least, all 4 members of the VECTOR’s ethics management and advisory board are not free from conflict of interest in informing an interdisciplinary raw materials project on public acceptance and mining conflicts: At least two advisors have or still serve as corporate defenders in various high-profile fraud, bribery and corruption cases, e.g. for Eurasian Natural Resources Corporation (Kazakhstan, Africa), Rio Tinto (Simandou mine, Guinea), Alstom (Tunisia), and Atalaya Mining Plc (Spain). On one advisor’s own report and, apart from a work history with the VECTOR partner and mining consultancy Satarla Ltd, he was, in the early 2000s, “buying dynamite from a corner shop [in Potosi, Bolivia] to hand it as a present to artisanal silver miners”. 3rd advisor “offers to assist companies earn and retain […] approval from the communities” through his own advisory firm, having published on “Earning the Social License” for the Dingleton resettlement project (co-authorship with a Anglo American employee), a socio-environmental conflict around the South African Sishen opencast mine, owned by Kumba Iron Ore. The 4th member, long-term servant of the French military forces, including during the French counter-insurgency operations Serval and Barkhane in Mali, publishes on conflict mitigation and resolution operations, including how the armed conflict outcomes and use of technology in modern warfare can “be employed in other missions … such as pacification operations”, e.g. French Yellow Vests Protests. Sources available, please contact mineria@ecologistasenaccion.org.

^[ix] https://euobserver.com/green-economy/157619

^[x] These programs include  INFACT, NEMO, RAWMINA, INTMET and BioMOre, many of which carry a “social license” component.

^[xi] https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2021-0468_EN.html

^[xii] For example, the Touro copper proposal in Spain plans an 81-meter-high dam just 200 meters upstream from the village of Arinteiro. While Brazil and Ecuador prohibit tailing dams less than 10 km upstream from potentially affected communities and China prohibits them at a distance of less than 1 km, EU legislation imposes no restrictions.

^[xiii] https://www.europarl.europa.eu/cmsdata/243324/Hearing%2002.12.2021%20testimony%20Emerman.pdf

^[xiv] The signatories consider mining waste, the extractive waste directive and related BAT norms as insufficient. Pressure due to fast-tracked permitting, and the reversal of evidence in favor of corporate misconduct in European regulations, including the CRMA, is worsening socioecological conditions in Europe and beyond. 

^[xv] Certej 1971; Aznalcóllar, 1998; Baia Mare and Baia Borşa, 2000; Aitik, 2000; Sasa, 2003; Malvési, 2004; Ajka, 2010; Talvivaara, 2012; Kostajnik, 2014; Kittilä/Suurikuusikko, 2015; Cobre Las Cruces, 2019; Kevitsa, 2023.

^[xvi] Pitron, G.; Pérez, J.-L. (2019). Le vert n’est pas vert! [film]. Paris: Arte France.

^[xvii] European Academies’ Science Advisory Council (EASAC), 2023. statement “Deep-Sea Mining: assessing evidence on future needs and environmental impacts”. https://easac.eu/publications/details/deep-sea-mining-assessing-evidence-on-future-needs-and-environmental-impacts

^[xviii] “Today, depending on the metal concerned, about three times as much material needs to be moved for the same ore extraction as a century ago, with concomitant increases in land disruption, groundwater implications and energy use”. International Resource Panel (2011). Decoupling natural resource use and environmental impacts from economic growth. Nairobi: UNEP. At: https://www.ourenergypolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/decoupling.pdf

^[xix] In Romania, the proposed Rovina mine has 0.16% copper and it would be the second largest in Europe.

^[xx] Bolger, Meadhbh, Diego Marin, Adrien Tofighi-Niaki, and Louelle Seelmann. “‘Green Mining’ Is a Myth: The Case for Cutting EU Resource Consumption.” Brussels,: European Environmental Bureau Friends of the Earth Europe, 2021, p.14. https://friendsoftheearth.eu/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Methodology-considerations-Annex-to-green-mining-is-a-myth.pdf.

^[xxi] Dunlap, Alexander. “The Green Economy as Counterinsurgency, or the Ontological Foundations for Permanent Ecological Catastrophe.” Environmental Policy and Science, 2023, 39–50.

^[xxii] Michaux, Simon P. “The Mining of Minerals and the Limits to Growth.” Geological Survey of Finland: Espoo, Finland, 2021, 1–72.; partially exposed by Simon Michaux to DG GROW on November 18th 2022

^[xxiii] Dunlap, Alexander. “Spreading ‘Green’ Infrastructural Harm: Mapping Conflicts and Socioecological Disruptions within the European Union’s Transnational Energy Grid.” Globalizations 20, no. 6 (2023): 907–31, https://doi.org/10.1080/14747731.2021.1996518.

^[xxiv] Objection submitted to the Commission’s DG GROW on 22nd November 2022 by MiningWatch Portugal

^[xxv] 10 years of EU’s failed biofuels policy has wiped out forests the size of the Netherlands – study – Transport & Environment (transportenvironment.org) https://www.transportenvironment.org/discover/10-years-of-eus-failed-biofuels-policy-has-wiped-out-forests-the-size-of-the-netherlands-study/

Signatories reject the proposed legislation because of its disregard for environmental and human rights, endorsement of social engineering, and failure to address Europe’s obsolete mining regulations and the urgency of reducing demand. If approved, the Act will fast-track permitting procedures, water down environmental laws and set the floor to inject billions of euros into socially and environmentally irresponsible mining corporations.

“The European Parliament and the Commission had the opportunity to meet the needs of local communities with this law and they failed miserably,” says Bojana Novakovic from the movement against lithium mining “Marš sa Drine” in Serbia. “We are tired of begging, pleading and negotiating. The EU has failed us, so we are sending a clear message – withdraw the law or you will see us on the streets and in court.”

The announcement earlier this week of a political agreement between the European Parliament and the European Council to push forward with the Critical Raw Materials Act (CRMA) has brought about an immediate reaction among civil society organizations, local communities as well as experts and academics across the world. Recalling the ongoing political crisis in Portugal and its connection with two lithium mining projects, the letter warns that the regulation will extend the influence of the mining lobby and spread even more corruption due to less regulation. 

It also exposes how EU policymakers have failed to see beyond the Brussels ‘bubble’, disregarding the potentially catastrophic impacts of a new mining boom. Signatories condemn the proposed legislation’s endorsement of ‘social acceptance’ activities aimed at changing public opposition to mining projects into passive tolerance or active support. The letter also exposes 25 projects funded by the EU at a total cost of €181M with deliverables that seek out to build public acceptance for extractive projects.

“It’s simple for us,” says a representant from MiningWatch Romania: “Approval of the CRMA will lead to legal action as the proposed legislation would breach rights of public participation in environmental decision making, enshrined by the Aarhus Convention which the European Union ratified.”

On the situation in Portugal, the founder of MiningWatch Portugal, Nik Völker, adds: “Unfortunately, non-compliance seems to be the norm in Portugal, even in well-documented cases known to the authorities. The Borba tragedy, the tailings from the Panasqueira mine and, since last week, the acid waters in Aljustrel, also testify to a precarious state of the competent authorities. The Brussels ‘bubble’ that envisages permitting in two years seems a long way from our reality of projects that are already half a decade in the process, for example for Lithium in the Barroso area.”

Letter to the Commission: https://miningwatch.pt/public/OpenLetter-CSO-CRMA_2023-11-16.pdf

FEAR OF A RETURN OF THE MINES: Brussels is preparing a new law — the Critical Raw Materials Act — to facilitate mining in Europe. But activists are now mobilizing against it, warning the law would steamroll over local environmental opposition and even allow the construction of mines in protected natural reserves.

There’s always a news hook: “In Portugal the prime minister resigned over a probe into corruption over lithium mining,” Bojana Novakovic, a Serbian-Australian actor-turned-activist who is campaigning against mining projects, told Playbook. “Communities on the ground … have been expressing grave concerns about lack of transparency relating to this project for years.”

Corruption warning: “Corruption is endemic to mining, and the Critical Raw Materials [Act] is a law which would simply make more of that corruption legal,” Novakovic said. “It would make the lives of local communities, the lands we care for and the nature we live with even more difficult than it is now.”

Background: The law — currently in negotiations — establishes a benchmark that at least 10 percent of the “strategic raw materials” consumed by the EU should be extracted in domestic mines. As part of the measures to speed up mining projects, the regulation would reduce opportunities for local opposition groups to delay permits for new mines.

‘Overriding public interest’: The act currently sets a deadline for authorities of a maximum of 24 months to grant extraction permits. It also limits the public consultation period for environmental impact assessments to 90 days, pointing to an “overriding public interest” that such projects move forward.

Activists gear up: “The Critical Raw Materials Act is set to take a wrecking ball to human rights and environmental protection,” Laura Sullivan from the WeMove Europe activist network told Playbook. Together with Novakovic and other local organizations, WeMove is launching an online petition to scrap the act.

Re-shoring pollution: “Supplying Europe used to be a Global South problem and was arguably easier to hide,” Sullivan argued. “But the Critical Raw Materials Act will bring the mining scale up to European countries like Portugal, Spain, Ireland … it’s about to become a major problem for people in Europe.”

The Regulatory Institute for Renewable Energy and the Environment (RERI) has said that the Ministry of Mining and Energy is unjustifiably extending the deadline for Rio Tinto to obtain a license for lithium mining in Serbia.

Rio Tinto has been trying for more than two years to obtain approval to open a lithium exploration mine in Serbia and it needs a document that allows it to start mining lithium in Serbia, despite the fact that it did not attach the necessary documentation to the relevant application, RERI added.

The Serbian government did say that the Rio Tinto lithium project in Serbia had been stopped and that all line authorities would immediately suspend all relevant procedures.

Nevertheless, the Ministry of Mining and Energy has not stopped the procedure for issuing the permit for lithium exploitation, but over the course of two years, without giving clear reasons, extended the deadline for the company to complete the documentation 11 times.

“Rio Tinto does not have the document on determining the scope and content of the environmental impact assessment study, because it was canceled in January of last year,” says Hristina Vojvodić, RERI’s legal advisor.

Although the company filed a lawsuit with the Administrative Court against the annulment decision, this does not constitute a justified reason for extending the deadline for supplementing the relevant documentation, the statement added.

(Nova Ekonomija) Full article at Serbian Monitor

SIGNING OF THE JADAR DECLARATION OF SOLIDARITY

Gornje Nedeljice and Dobrinje – July 9 and 10

Activists from Chile, Bolivia, Portugal, Spain and Germany are gathering this week in Belgrade,  Serbia to sign a declaration of solidarity against lithium mining. They will travel to the Jadar Valley for the signing, the location under threat from Rio Tinto’s planned lithium mining project.

In 2021 Serbia, a wave of national protests against Rio Tinto’s proposed lithium mining project swept across the country and exposed not just the dangers of lithium and borate extraction, but also the limits of the so-called “Green Transition.” What’s more, the blockades came close to toppling the Serbian government, and the only thing which prevented an overthrow was the government’s own cancellation of Rio Tinto’s project.

This presents one of the first successful examples of mass mobilizations against lithium extraction in Europe, by which the stepping stone was laid for future developments. Mining companies have every intent to return to the region. Rio Tinto just announced that they will try to resurrect their proposed project “now that elections are out of the way,” which puts into question their ethical boundaries around the democratic rights of the Serbian people. Other anglo and commonwealth companies have arrived as well. Excavation machines and land-grabbing have become increasingly prevalent. Very little international cooperation has taken place on the issues of lithium extraction. Public awareness of its dangers has been greenwashed by the marketing of its role in the energy transition. We feel that it is a great moment for establishing links between similar struggles in other areas of Europe and the world.

To that end, Serbian NGO ECO Societal action and the campaign against Rio Tinto, Marš sa Drine – a network of over 20 organizations united for the protection of Serbia’s fertile lands – have invited organizations with similar struggles to meet. Our aim is to establish a network that will share information and act simultaneously when the environment of any single one of us is threatened. Given that the problem of extraction is local in one respect but international in another, so too must be its solutions. If globalization is going to interfere with our health, food, water and air, then we too will globalize our plight for preservation of the same. This is a way of strengthening solidarity between peripheral nations and exploited areas in core capitalist countries. We don’t only have a common adversary in multinational mining corporations. We share a commitment to preserve the environments which we are part of and to protect the most precious resources of the future; our food, water, air and soil. We insist on a truly just transition away from extractivism, overproduction, over consumption and the exploitation that the profit system is built on.

In order to do this, we will make an official commitment by signing a declaration in the Jadar valley – right in the heart of where Rio Tinto is planning its dirty mining project. Together with organizations from Portugal, Chile, UK, Germany, Spain, and other countries hit by lithium mining in the name of the “green transition” we will be making our commitment of solidarity official by becoming signatories of the “Jadar declaration.”

We are organizing a set of international meetings that aim at knowledge exchange. We will share experiences from those meetings and next steps on July 8th in an open press conference in Belgrade, Serbia with activists from Spain, Portugal, Chile, Croatia and Bosnia. On the 9th and 10th of July, organizations will travel to the Village of Gornje Nedeljice and then Dobrinje to sign the “Jadar declaration” of international solidarity against lithium mining^[1].

^[1] Contact Aleksandar Matkovic – salematkovic@gmail.com +381 62 1037677

Bojana Novakovic – bojana@marssadrine.org +13102271805

Environmental organizations have sent a clear message to Rio Tinto’s shareholders: the company’s insistence to carry on with the formally canceled project will only strengthen the opposition to it and the possibility of social unrest, carrying with it financial and political risk, the Marš sa Drine initiative and Earth Thrive said.

The protest was joined by the WeMove Europe and London Mining Network, which organized the arrival of activists from Arizona, Madagascar, and Serbia. A titanium mine is planned in Arizona, while in the island country Rio Tinto is operating a copper mine.

Of note, in 2023 Rio Tinto marks 150 years of operation.

Rio Tinto is not welcome in Serbia, activists said during the protest, which is part of a campaign called Rio Tinto: Against People, Climate and Nature and the International Day of Action against Rio Tinto.

The environmentalists also took 500,000 signatures to the door of Rio Tinto’s headquarters in London.

The representative of Serbian activists in London, Nebojša Petrović, a resident of the affected village of Gornje Nedeljice in the country’s west and a member of the Ne damo Jadar association, took the opportunity to ask the company’s officials why it hasn’t left Serbia after the spatial plan for a lithium mine and processing plant was annulled, and why it keeps buying land from private owners.

“The Ne damo Jadar association will fight Rio Tinto together with all other environmental organizations until it drives you out of Serbia,” Petković said.

He later explained he didn’t get any straightforward answer and that he also asked why the company insists on the project after the Serbian experts said that its implementation is the path to an ecological disaster.

They just said it was not true, Petković added.

Full article on Balkan Green Energy News

the Serbian government’s decision to cancel the Jadar proposal.

*

Joint Statement – Press Release

Mars Sa Drine^[1] and Extinction Rebellion Serbia

Belgrade/Serbia 09.05.2022 – At the Rio Tinto AGM in Australia on 5 May 2022, the outgoing Chairman of the Board, Mr. Simon Thompson stated that “we very much hope that we will be able to discuss all of the options with the government of Serbia now the elections are out of the way.”^[2]

This statement undermines the Serbian people who stood their ground in the streets in 2021 against Rio Tinto. Their voice was reflected by the government’s decision on January 20 2022 to annul the Special Purpose Spatial Plan, Jadar; the legal basis for Rio Tinto’s project and all subsequent permits, including procedure to obtain the environmental permit. Prime Minister Ana Brnabic stated that “Everything has been annulled. This means we’ve met the demands of environmental protests and have put a full stop on Rio Tinto in Serbia.”^[3]

What’s more, over 37,000 notarized signatures have been gathered for a national citizen’s initiative against lithium and borate mining in just 20 days. Initiators will present the bill to parliament after the summer recess. Along with an existing petition of over 290,000 signatures, this shows overwhelming public support against lithium and borate mining. With this in mind Mr. Thompson’s statement is ever more displaced as it comes in total disregard for the will of the people. The Prime Minister herself said: “With this act, everything to do with Project Jadar and Rio Tinto is over. It’s finished.”^[4]

This press release contains exclusively the official government decree in Serbian^[5] and English^[6] languages, along with the cancellation of the EIA procedure.^[7]

“Serbia’s effort to transition into a politically stable country that finally works for and listens to its people, will be jeopardized if companies like Rio Tinto believe they can undermine democracy by flexing their muscles and trying to re-introduce nepotism. The government made its choice: it listened to the people.”  Bojana  Novakovic, Mars Sa Drine Collective

“Serbia will not be used to absolve the EU’s or Rio Tinto’s guilt for not having acted on climate change. The people of Serbia have recognized that food and water are more important than the profits of a multinational corporation, inconvenient as that may be for Rio Tinto.” Milica D. Zavrnot Extinction Rebellion Serbia

^[1] Marš sa Drine is a national campaign against the mining of lithium and borates in Serbia. We are a collective of over 20 NGOs, citizens, independent experts, activists from Serbia and beyond, united to protect the Jadar Valley and the rest of Serbia from the devastating effects of mining on fertile soil. Our mission is to support locals who protect their land against lithium & borate exploitation and the forced relocation that entails. We work based on social, environmental, economic and legal principles.

^[2] https://www.reuters.com/business/rio-tinto-keen-restart-talks-stalled-serbian-lithium-project-2022-05-05/

^[3] https://www.politika.rs/sr/clanak/497517/Brnabic-Ukinut-prostorni-plan-za-Jadar-i-sve-ostale-odluke

^[4] https://www.politika.rs/sr/clanak/497517/Brnabic-Ukinut-prostorni-plan-za-Jadar-i-sve-ostale-odluke

^[5] Serbian Version: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/drlsu1460xfj9fz/AAAd9wN4OM71zRvwxnWiFVu5a?dl=0

^[6] English Version: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/ztygwe99pyy4whp/AACCyDorgSuQ88laOkLns5TEa?dl=0

^[7] https://novaekonomija.rs/vesti-iz-zemlje/poni%C5%A1tena-sva-re%C5%A1enja-ministarstva-za-projekat-jadar

The JADAR valley is a unique ecosystem of nature and humanity. Surrounded by mountains and two rivers, this valley is home to generations of famers, who produce over 70 million Euros of agricultural yield every year. The valley is self-sustaining and feeds not just its inhabitants, but surrounding areas as well. Groundwaters run so deep that even during drought, crops yield food. There are schools, churches and shops, a thriving cultural landscape and thousands who want to remain and maintain what has been handed to them for over generations from their predecessors.

In May 2021 the European Commission confirmed that the EIA directive and SEA directive will be applicable for assessing the environmental impact of the Jadar proposal and  that the EIA must cover the entire proposal so as to assess its cumulative impact. In early July 2021 Serbia’s ministry for the environment released RT’s scoping presentation report.^[1] It was incomplete and contained only the mine complex without the processing plant and tailings landfill. Assessment proper was supposed to commence early december 2021 and then construction in 2022, but enormous public opposition, including a petition with over 290 thousand signatures (5% of Serbia’s population), a book released by the Academy of Sciences^[2] and two weeks of civil disobedience with over 100 thousand on the streets, led the government to annulling the Special Purpose Spatial Plan – Jadar, the legal premise for the project^[3]. They did this in view of quieting the subject before elections, after which President Vucic announced that the cancellation had been a mistake. The company then stated they hope to “be able to discuss all of the options with the government of Serbia now the elections are out of the way.” Mars sa Drine responded stating that “Serbia’s effort to transition into a politically stable country will be jeopardized if companies like Rio Tinto believe they can undermine democracy and try to re-introduce nepotism. The government made its choice: it listened to the people.”^[4] This new but not unexpected reality means that our movement continues until we have achieved complete legal protection of Jadar and sent Rio Tinto and any other potential investors packing.

Rio Tinto’s lithium and borate proposal in the Jadar Valley covers 22 villages. The area is a rich agricultural area consisting of farming, bee-keeping, tourism etc. Agricultural yields alone are estimated at over 70 million Euros per year.^[6] The spatial plan for the mine embraces an area of 2,031 hectares for a special purpose complex, accompanying corridors and traffic infrastructure systems.​ Nearly 200 hectares of forests would need to be cut: 80 hectares for roads/ railways and 164 hectares for 35% of projected tailings. Rio Tinto needs to purchase 600 hectares of land from 335 landowners to continue development. The mine is envisaged on the bank of the Korenita river, a tributary to the Jadar river, with underground mining to be performed underneath both riverbeds. Close by, a flotation facility would use 1000 tons of concentrated sulfuric acid per day (to be diluted by 5000-6000 tons of water). The proposal is designed to operate 24/7 over a mine life of 60 years.

Tailings are to be located a few hundred meters from the mine, close to the rivers and will amount to 1.3 million tons per year (90 million tons during mine life). The Jadar and Korenita are prone to flooding every year, with the most recent large floods being in 2020. There is a high risk that tailings will end up in these two rivers, then flow into the Drina, Sava, and the Danube. The Drina flows into Bosnia & Herzegovina and the Danube flows into Romania. It is expected that changes in temperature will imply a higher risk of floods in extremely rainy periods, and of droughts in extremely warm periods of the year^[7].
The proposal is low-cost and expandable,^[8] which taken together is the worst combination for a mine as most accidents occur with badly planned (low cost) mine extensions that keep adding to the tailings and waste deposits planned for the initial or first phase of the mine.

Rio Tinto’s jadarite (lithium and borate) mine proposal in Serbia^[5]

The proposal is situated in an area of exceptional archaeological importance and Rio Tinto is currently considering an alternative to the current tailings site which would be situated in close proximity to Paulje, an archaeological site roughly 3500 years old. The Spatial Plan mentions some of them but omits several extremely important archeological and cultural sites and natural monuments (sections 5.1.1 and 6.2).^[9]

So far lithium mining has not existed anywhere in the world on fertile soil. A proposal in the Nevada desert was recently stopped due to the detrimental effect of the technology involved on sage, grouse and other wildlife and is now in question due to the ancestral bones of native Americans. Yet in Serbia the government seems determined to permit a vast and murky proposal that will destroy inhabited and thriving villages built on fertile land that has been farmed for generations, with exceptional heritage values and protected species of animals.

There exists considerable local, national and transnational^[10] opposition to the mine proposal. Ne Damo Jadar (NDJ) is an association of 335 property owners, based in the Jadar Valley, Western Serbia opposed to Rio Tinto’s proposed lithium and borate mine and processing center based on social, environmental, economic and heritage grounds. Marš sa Drine (MSD) is a network comprising 20 organizations and independent experts throughout Serbia and its diaspora.A petition launched by MSD has gathered over 290,000 signatures (5% of the Serbian population) against the proposed mine. 

Irregularities are already identified from Rio Tinto’s project presentation and scoping report:^[11] They state that it “refers to only one part of the entire project, more precisely to the underground exploitation project.” Provisions of the EIA Directive cannot be avoided by splitting projects into smaller projects, and failing to take into account their cumulative environmental impact.^[12]/[13] The PPR does not include ore processing and final products, as well chemical and other ore treatment, or planned solutions for treatment and disposal of waste. Hence there is no mention or description of the technology used for the processing of lithium ore, how the mining waste will be treated, what its character is, its composition, the location of the landfill, or any other information related to it. There is no description on the significance and quality of natural resources in existence or on protected natural areas.^[14]

An open letter from the Serbian Academy of Science and Arts to prime minister Ana Brnabićoutlines experts’ concerns of environmental and scientific irregularities in the project.  Their peer approved publication “Project Jadar – what is known” contains numerous studies, analysis and opinions on the catastrophic potentialities of this project. In September 2021 Banktrack also listed the Jadar proposal on their dodgy deal database, where letters to banks and investors of Rio Tinto and to their shareholders are made public.

It is no exaggeration to state that Serbia’s government has no control over the implementation of its own environmental protection laws, let alone of its obligations towards the environmental acquis. Premier Ana Brnabic endorsed Rio Tinto’s proposal of ‘strategic importance’ in 2021 without even the existence of an EIA or feasibility report.

The project has been fraught with irregularities at the highest political level.  In 2017 the Serbian government and Rio Tinto signed a memorandum of understanding^[15] (MOU) which was withheld from the public for many years (despite Rio Tinto’s claims for CSR, transparency etc.)^[16] In spring 2021 the government approved the proposal’s local spatial plan despite being incomplete. It was adopted without a feasibility study at its base (which is a legal requirement) and without a long-term exploitation program, required for projects longer than 10 years. This local spatial plan was annulled after local opposition gathered 5 thousands signatures in 7 days. However the annulment did not legally alter the company’s permits as they were based on the federal Special Purpose Spatial Plan, which was only canceled on January 20 2022 after public pressure, and also came with controversies of its own.

The EU Commission has been a strong supporter of the project’s development; going so far as to endorse it despite its early stages. In October 2021, Mars sa Drine exposed correspondence between EU Commission department DG Grow and Rio Tinto which showed the mine was planned to receive approval in May 2022, after Serbia’s general elections, and that it had the support of Serbian President, Aleksandrar Vucic^[17]. This generated significant backlash against Vucic because he had actually announced that the decision over Jadar would belong to the people via a national referendum. To amplify this betrayal, Mars sa Drine and experts met with EU ambassador, Emanuele Giaufret, where it was made clear that further political pressure on this project would have adverse effects for the relationship between the Serbian people and the European Union.

Reacting to huge on- and off-line public outcry at a time of imminent general elections, Serbia’s prime minister announced on 20 January 2022 that Rio Tinto’s entire mine proposal had been canceled with the annulment of the Special Purpose Spatial Plan, which is the legal basis for all of the project’s permits.^[18]

A correct legal procedure following the cancellation of the SPSP would have been for all relevant authorities to repeal without delay all individual acts they adopted with connection to this spatial plan. That did not happen, and requests for access to this information yielded no results. However, it was widely reported  that Rio Tinto was continuing to purchase properties within the project footprint, as well as trespassing on local activists’ land.

Then, a mere week ahead of 3 April, a whistleblower shared evidence confirming that Rio Tinto was currently working with Thyssen Schachtbau on delivering a VSM boring machine to the Jadar Valley in April.  A press conference released material of the leak which made front page news and was covered by several news portals. The government reacted instantly stating that “the Administrative Commission annulled the decision of the Ministry of Environmental Protection on the scope and content of the EIA.”^[19] The announcement was not as significant as its timing because this should have happened months before, and the leak indicates that the project will either proceed or go toward arbitration.

To that end, civil society groups initiated a “citizens initiative” which is a process that grants its authors the right to present a bill to parliament if they manage to gather 30,000 notarized signatures. In this instance, 36,000 signatures were gathered in 20 days. The request is for a legal ban on the extraction of lithium and borates in Serbia. It will be presented as soon as parliament reconvenes after the summer recess.

Organisation Earth Thrive submitted a complaint against the Jadar Project to the Bureau of the Bern Convention, of which Serbia is a full signatory, in April of 2022.[20] The complaint outlines serious harm that could be caused to the numerous and highly protected species and wild habitats in the region, and carries within it potential evidence of breaches of international law and ethical corporate social responsibility. “’In consideration of the ecological value of the area at the center of the complaint,” The Bureau “expressed its concern on the considerable negative effects on the species and habitats that the construction of a lithium mine would have.” The Bureau has put the Complaint on ‘stand-by’ ready to be opened should the project be officially resurrected, which, as we have come to understand is exactly what the government and the company are trying to orchestrate.

In May 2022, through a Freedom of information request response, it was revealed that the exploitation license for the Jadar mining complex, which was supposed to have been cancelled with the Spatial Plan, was still in process[21]. This was further confirmed by the Ministry for Mining in October[22]. An open letter to Prime Minister Ana Brnabic, from MSD and local landowners demanding clarification for these legal irregularities, still remains unanswered.

At around the same time Rio Tinto was having behind closed doors meetings with the European Commission, sharing new strategies for their officially cancelled project. EU documents revealed by MSD show that Rio Tinto was forming relationships with locals and academic institutions, and strategising to get involved in agriculture[23].

In October, local businesses started receiving email requests for quotes regarding work on a waste water treatment for Project Jadar from US company Bechtel[24]. In response to public complaints about this and job offers for HR, senior advisor for brand and digital, a communication analyst and a travel administrator, as well as further property purchases, Rio Tinto put out a statement on their website[25] claiming they have “outstanding legal commitments including the completion of an internal feasibility study. They claim to “respect the government’s decision to revoke all permits and licenses for the project” despite evidence of the licensing procedure still being in process.

Representatives of nine organizations from Serbia, Portugal, Germany, Chile and Spain signed the Jadar Declaration on international solidarity against lithium exploitation and for environmental protection. The dominant narrative around lithium normalizes “sacrifice zones,” and the Jadar declaration is a basis for mutual support, cooperation, exchanging information and help against the expansion of lithium ore mining and other kinds of extractivism brought by an unjust energy transition. The greenwashing of the energy transition saw further exposure in media coverage about the potential sacrifice of The Balkans for Europe’s Energy transition with the latter’s attempt to move away from reliance on China. 

Given the huge public awareness campaign in Serbia, other regions in danger from lithium exploration have themselves been active. In December the people of Valjevo won a victory against mining company Euro Lithium, after the Ministry for mining refused to renew the company’s exploration license, while local citizens of the villages of the Levac area have been camping for over four months in order to protect an acre of land from being test drilled.

As prime minister Ana Brnabic proclaims that this is a historic opportunity for Serbia, negating her previous statements that she has put a “full stop” to the Jadar Project, we continue to prepare for further actions in the goal of protecting and preserving the Jadar Valley.

“There are things that money can’t buy. Our land, our roots, our home, our heritage are not for sale, nor are our souls. We inherited everything we have, and it is our obligation to pass it on to our grandchildren. You do not have our permission to build a mine in the Jadar Valley! We will defend this country at the cost of our lives.” Zlatko Kokanović, vice president of the association “Ne Damo Jadar”.

We just want our normal little lives back. We want to do our agriculture and our jobs. We do not want to think about the mine, nor about pollution. Life is in full force here. Our children, these fields, houses, – this took generations to build. One company cannot erase all this or erase the traditions of our people. Marijana Trbović Petković, “Ne Damo Jadar” Gornje Nedeljice.

Given that the insatiable drive for profit is what got us into the climate crisis in the first place, is its solution a cheap mine in the hands of a world polluter, where we replace one form of extraction with another? If we let Rio Tinto come to Europe, we are incentivising environmental degradation at the expense of looking at real solutions. We are allowing corporations who are responsible for the climate crisis to act as if they are its solution. Bojana Novakovic – co-ordinator Mars Sa Drine campaign 

For further information please email us at info@marssadrine.org

Download the information sheet here. Public use of this document is permitted with the credit: “Author: Marš Sa Drine, Serbia. www.marssadrine.org”

[1] https://www.dropbox.com/sh/shz8l6p3aejm7qr/AAAY7p4K8LEVr0JY3h5lBpEYa?dl=0

[2] https://www.euronews.rs/srbija/drustvo/39320/zbornik-radova-sanu-eskploatacija-litijuma-ostavila-bi-velike-posledice-na-zivotnu-sredinu/vest

[3] https://www.dropbox.com/sh/awlij2fn7n0arx3/AACJAYuKmCNEZESenxFd4n4ka?dl=0

[4] https://www.dropbox.com/s/fcac3gn7jctwkpj/XR_MSD%20Joint%20Press%20Release.pdf?dl=0

[5] https://www.riotinto.com/en/operations/projects/jadar

[6] https://marssadrine.org/en/ratko-ristic-rad-sanu-serbian-academy-of-sciences/

[7] (Observed climate changes and projections of the future climate based on different scenarios of future emissions, Vladimir Đurđević, Ana Vuković and Mirjam Vujadinović Mandić, United Nations Development Program, 2018).

[8] https://www.riotinto.com/-/media/Content/Documents/Operations/Jadar/RT-Jadar-Fact-sheet-EN.pdf

[9] The Law on Mining and Geological Research explicitly prohibits a company, ie other legal entity and entrepreneur, which has due but unsettled obligations on the basis of, among other things, unfulfilled obligations related to the rehabilitation and protection of the environment and cultural goods and goods that enjoy prior protection, to be the bearer of exploration and exploitation. Article 31, paragraph 3 of the Law on Nature Protection prohibits all actions and activities that endanger the features and values ​​of the natural monument, which will arise from the implementation of the “Jadar” project.

[10] Environmental organizations in Romania are extremely worried about potential transboundary impact of an accidental spill into the Drina river. They have requested their environment minister trigger the ESPOO Convention transboundary impact assessment.

[11] https://www.dropbox.com/sh/a1hkx3fie33oq1f/AAA_4Cmj6aGNzUc6uVHhtjnaa?dl=0

[12] (Republic of Serbia, Ministry of Environmental Protection, decision number 353-02-00984 / 2020-03, dated 5.6.2020)

[13] https://curia.europa.eu/juris/showPdf.jsf;jsessionid=C5DC2B5FA562F10AEE65605779F05FF9?text=&docid=44721&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=549973

[14] There is no mention of:

1. “Cer” (classification code RS024IBA), total area of ​​about 19,000 hectares.
2. “Cer” – part of the IBA program and verified within BLI (BirdLife International), which has 130 registered bird species.

National protected species of birds and fish, including the MLADICA (saplings), which sees its highest concentration in the Drina and was declared a protected species – Declared by the Rulebook on the Proclamation of Protected and Strictly Protected Wild Species of Plants, Animals and Fungi (“Official Gazette of RS”, No. 5/10 and 47/11) and on the IUCN global list of endangered species it is classified as endangered (EN B2ab (ii, iii)).

[15] https://www.riotinto.com/news/releases/Jadar-MoU-Serbia-signed

[16] https://www.dropbox.com/sh/0j0hlb2d88z3985/AABUHcdg_J3-AfUQu1lPdYVBa?dl=0

[17] https://www.dropbox.com/sh/22mx5n4j5wrrwpb/AAA0tJbrpg8Kk8aEtrlSAI9Ba?dl=0

[18] https://www.dropbox.com/sh/awlij2fn7n0arx3/AACJAYuKmCNEZESenxFd4n4ka?dl=0

[19] https://www.dropbox.com/sh/6rdcq98liqf8loh/AACT-bubW6ScQ3vX-HtDgkXha?dl=0

[20] https://www.dropbox.com/s/fcac3gn7jctwkpj/XR_MSD%20Joint%20Press%20Release.pdf?dl=0

[21] https://www.dropbox.com/s/qdgrkptsntv7t93/CommonwealthBankAus_13072022.pdf?dl=0

[20] https://www.dropbox.com/sh/6yaxjyujkr1l7f6/AADVuYSwE_H8_gtM1BEy04nna?dl=0

[21] https://www.dropbox.com/s/ylcf6cnt0s5fdq2/3.%20060122%20ministarstvo%20rudarstva%20i%20energetike%20odgovor.pdf?dl=0

[22] https://www.dropbox.com/s/7xri0pawi7hhq75/6.%20101022%20sa%20potpisom.pdf?dl=0

[23] https://www.dropbox.com/sh/b4mfmbg6esnhu18/AAClDKGTgHG6CcuZ0wqXvCqOa?dl=0

[24] https://www.danas.rs/vesti/drustvo/seos-rio-tinto-i-behtel-rade-na-projektu-za-preciscivanje-otpadnih-voda-za-projekat-jadar/

[25] https://riotintoserbia.com/mediji/saopstenja-za-javnost/2022/2022-08-10-Interna-studija-izvodljivosti-mora-biti-zavrsena

Internal Feasibility study must be completed AUGUST 10TH, 2022 This statement is a response to the SEOS claim that Rio Tinto and Bechtel are progressing the development of the Jadar Project. Rio Tinto reiterates that it respects the Government decision earlier this year to revoke all permits and licenses for the project. We are continuing to conduct our business activities in accordance with Serbian laws. All of our activities are a continuation of previous commitments. This includes completing the internal Feasibility Study, which requires collecting and assessing design data from relevant vendors in order to meet applicable technical, environmental and sustainability standards. The Feasibility Study is being completed in partnership with Bechtel, who have provided Project Management Contractor (PMC) support to the project since 2018.

The ‘Kreni – Promeni’ (‘Go-Change’)” campaign staged a performance on Friday outside the US Embassy building in Belgrade in protest against US Ambassador Christopher Hill’s support for the Rio Tinto company and lithium mining. Following the performance, the Ambassador stepped outside to talk to the performers.

Campaign director Savo Manojlovic said they came to express their dissatisfaction with the Ambassador’s statement that Rio Tinto is not just an ordinary mining project and that the US is trying to support this company in Serbia.

He described Hill’s statement as completely impermissible and said they deeply believe it is contrary to the values of the Ambassador’s country.

He noted that when talking about democracy, Thomas Jefferson said that “When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny,” and that a people’s initiative to ban lithium mining was submitted to the Serbian Parliament last year which, contrary to the Constitution, has still not been put on the agenda.

Manojlovic reminded the US Ambassador that mass protests have been held in Serbia against lithium mining and told him that, if the US has interest in Serbia, it will not support the Rio Tinto project in any way.

Hill told Manojlovic that he gave the statement on lithium to the Glas Sumadije (Voice of Sumadija) portal and that he very much respects local media and seriously replies to all their questions the same way he does when speaking for big media outlets.

The Ambassador said his second principle is to be frank, so he told Manojlovic that he will be frank with him too.

I want to be clear – how Serbs decide on their economy, development, on what raw materials they will use, that is Serbia’s business, said Hill, adding that nothing any foreign diplomat says will change that.

He said Glas Sumadije asked him for his opinion on lithium and that he said he believes Serbia needs more green energy. Lithium has to do with electric vehicles, that will be Serbia’s decision, but Serbia needs more electric cars, and that is part of modern economy, said Hill.

The Ambassador emphasized that the decision on this matter is for Serbia to make, but that he has the right to voice his opinion.

N1

US Ambassador to Serbia Christopher Hill said that Rio Tinto is not just an ordinary mining project because it will be tied to the modern economy and added that he is trying to cooperate on this issue with the Serbian Government.

I think it is important for people to understand that this is not just a mining project, a project in which something is extracted from the ground and exported. This project will be tied to the modern economy. The lithium extracted from the ground will be used for the production of batteries that will be installed in electric vehicles, Hill said in an interview with the Glas Sumadije portal.

He said he is trying to cooperate with the Serbian Government on this issue and that the US is trying to support Rio Tiinto that is partly, although not entirely, an American company.

I think it is very important that all those involved in this project respect the environment, that is the first rule, said Hill.

The Ambassador said effort should be made to point out to the citizens the need for this project to connect them with the green agenda, the green economy, because that is where they belong.

He assessed that this is a very complex issue that people living in this area should focus on, adding he believes everything will turn out fine if everyone works together and keeps in mind the needs of the future.