Raw mineral exports continue despite Cabinet ban
Government identifies loopholes
Mines minister Tom Alweendo says government is working on filling the cracks through which banned exports have continued to slip.
Mining companies are exploiting existing ‘loopholes’ and continue to export unprocessed lithium and other critical minerals from Namibia - despite a Cabinet ban to this effect.
During a Cabinet briefing in Windhoek yesterday, mines minister Tom Alweendo confirmed that government continues to grapple with the export of critical raw minerals despite the ban, which came into effect in June.
Only small quantities of specified minerals are allowed to be exported, with the minister's approval.
According to the Cabinet directive, all critical minerals must be beneficiated in-country before export.
“Cabinet approved the prohibition of the export of certain critical minerals, such as unprocessed crushed lithium ore, cobalt, manganese, graphite and rare earth minerals,” the directive read.
However, despite the ban, Alweendo conceded that government has not been able to effectively police the export of unprocessed critical minerals.
Closing loopholes
The minister said government was working on closing loopholes that allow the export of critical raw minerals to continue.
“We still have those who are not happy with this stance [the export ban], and they will try every trick in the book to export these minerals unprocessed, but that is something that we are working on, to close all the loopholes and [to ensure] that value-addition is taking place,” Alweendo said.
In July, the minister had to fight off suggestions that the export ban could be in contravention of World Trade Organisation conventions.
London-based lawyer Peter Leon warned that Namibia was not upholding international trade laws with its export ban.
But yesterday, Halweendo said government’s efforts to ensure beneficiation of critical minerals were aimed at fuelling Namibia’s industrialisation drive, and are the opposite of resource nationalisation.
“They go as far as accusing us of resource nationalisation, but that’s not what it is. We just want to make sure that our minerals mean more,” he said.
Motive behind beneficiation
According to Alweendo, there is sufficient grounds for the critical resources mineral ban because there is scope for local value-addition.
“The fact that there are minerals in high demand, it cannot be correct that we can do the mining of these minerals and allow it to be exported in raw form. I think we can do better by making sure there is value-addition.
“These raw minerals are critical for our industrialisation agenda,” he said.
“It is why we have taken a policy stance to say no critical raw minerals should be exported without value-addition.”
The decision to ban the export of critical minerals follows a similar move imposed by Zimbabwe in December 2022.
During a Cabinet briefing in Windhoek yesterday, mines minister Tom Alweendo confirmed that government continues to grapple with the export of critical raw minerals despite the ban, which came into effect in June.
Only small quantities of specified minerals are allowed to be exported, with the minister's approval.
According to the Cabinet directive, all critical minerals must be beneficiated in-country before export.
“Cabinet approved the prohibition of the export of certain critical minerals, such as unprocessed crushed lithium ore, cobalt, manganese, graphite and rare earth minerals,” the directive read.
However, despite the ban, Alweendo conceded that government has not been able to effectively police the export of unprocessed critical minerals.
Closing loopholes
The minister said government was working on closing loopholes that allow the export of critical raw minerals to continue.
“We still have those who are not happy with this stance [the export ban], and they will try every trick in the book to export these minerals unprocessed, but that is something that we are working on, to close all the loopholes and [to ensure] that value-addition is taking place,” Alweendo said.
In July, the minister had to fight off suggestions that the export ban could be in contravention of World Trade Organisation conventions.
London-based lawyer Peter Leon warned that Namibia was not upholding international trade laws with its export ban.
But yesterday, Halweendo said government’s efforts to ensure beneficiation of critical minerals were aimed at fuelling Namibia’s industrialisation drive, and are the opposite of resource nationalisation.
“They go as far as accusing us of resource nationalisation, but that’s not what it is. We just want to make sure that our minerals mean more,” he said.
Motive behind beneficiation
According to Alweendo, there is sufficient grounds for the critical resources mineral ban because there is scope for local value-addition.
“The fact that there are minerals in high demand, it cannot be correct that we can do the mining of these minerals and allow it to be exported in raw form. I think we can do better by making sure there is value-addition.
“These raw minerals are critical for our industrialisation agenda,” he said.
“It is why we have taken a policy stance to say no critical raw minerals should be exported without value-addition.”
The decision to ban the export of critical minerals follows a similar move imposed by Zimbabwe in December 2022.
Comments
Namibian Sun
No comments have been left on this article