Download logoThe Select Committee on Agriculture, Land Reform and Mineral Resources has said the impasse between Sogima Mining and the Department of Mineral and Petroleum Resources (DMPR) has come at an economic and social cost to the affected community.
The committee is conducting an oversight visit in Mafikeng in North West Province. The visit is a continuation of the committee’s commitment to resolving longstanding land and mining-related issues in the Madibeng area, following its initial oversight visit in March 2026.
During the March oversight, the committee engaged with various stakeholders, including Sogima Mining, the DMPR, the Black Mamba community and various government departments, about delays in relocating a community from mining land in Mooinooi Ward 27, Marikana, and the withdrawal of Sogima mining rights dating back to 2018.
At the centre of the dispute is the suspension of Sogima’s blasting activities following complaints from community members residing within a 500-metre radius of the mine. Approximately 234 households are located within the affected area. Residents had raised concerns about alleged property damage, dust pollution and safety risks associated with mining operations.
In today’s oversight engagement, the committee received presentations from the North West Department of Human Settlements, the DMPR, the Housing Development Agency, Madibeng Local Municipality and Sogima Mining.
The Department of Human Settlements noted that the government and its partners have invested approximately R49.2 million in infrastructure and services in the community, which includes electrification, water and sanitation projects, land acquisition and community facilities. The department also presented a relocation framework, indicating that relocating affected households could cost more than R76 million, excluding land acquisition and bulk infrastructure costs. The department concluded by recommending that the affected mining companies assume full financial responsibility of any future relocation process.
Responding to this input, committee members questioned both the costing model and the rationale behind shifting the financial burden onto mining company. Members maintained that portions of the expenditure highlighted in the presentation had been funded by entities other than government, including mining companies and Eskom, and sought clarity on how the figures had been calculated.
Department officials maintained that budget constraints and competing service delivery pressures limited the government’s ability to fund further interventions.
The DMPR’s Office of the Chief Mine Inspectorate explained that its primary obligation is to safeguard the health and safety of mine workers and communities affected by mining activities. The Inspectorate noted that the DMPR had consistently called for solutions that allow mining and residential activities to coexist.
The DMPR indicated that complaints about blasting activities had led to the withdrawal of Sogima’s blasting permissions. It also noted that efforts to address the problem had focused on consultation processes, compliance measures and exploring alternative mining methods and blasting technologies.
However, committee members questioned why the matter remains unresolved years after the department first intervened in 2018. They queried whether Sogima is being treated differently from other mining operations facing similar complaints. The department confirmed that blasting permissions at other mines had also been suspended at various times, but stated that those matters were resolved through consultations and corrective measures agreed upon by affected parties.
Sogima in its presentation described its struggle to continue operating amid the prolonged suspension of blasting activities. Sogima said that the mine had acquired its mining rights legally, compensated affected residents for damages that were identified after blasting incidents and participated in numerous consultations over the years.
Sogima has also invested resources in seeking solutions, including investigations into relocation options and alternative technical approaches. Despite those efforts, the continued inability to blast has prevented the business from operating at intended capacity and this has limited employment creation and economic participation.
Throughout the engagement, committee members raised concerns about the economic implications of the deadlock, particularly for job creation and investment.
Committee Chairperson Mr Mpho Modise made it clear that Parliament’s objective is not to revisit old arguments but to establish a practical path forward. The Chairperson stressed that the committee is determined to move beyond historical disagreements and focus on solutions. “The issue is no longer the department and Sogima. The issue is us and Sogima, because all of us here are representatives of government,” he said.
Mr Modise urged stakeholders to consider the lived realities of workers and families affected by the situation. “When we are seated tonight eating dinner, nicely sleeping, we must think about those people,” he said, referring to workers who would have not benefited from the mine’s operations.
The Chairperson questioned whether enough had been done to find technical solutions that would enable mining to continue while reducing the impact on nearby residents. During discussions, it emerged that Sogima and the DMPR are due to meet to discuss revised blasting methodologies and alternative technologies designed to minimise vibration, dust and noise.
Mr Modise challenged stakeholders to accelerate those discussions, saying that the committee could not continue returning to the same matter without measurable progress. He also emphasised that the committee expects stakeholders to return with concrete proposals.
As deliberations concluded, Mr Modise directed the parties to continue engaging on the technical proposals and return with a clear way forward. He emphasised that the committee’s ultimate goal is to balance community safety, regulatory obligations, employment creation and economic development.
The oversight visit continues today(13 August) at the North West Legislature Building.
Distributed by APO Group on behalf of Republic of South Africa: The Parliament.
