Tackling Galamsey: Legislative Instruments, States of Emergency, and Strategic Recommendations

The fight against illegal mining, or "galamsey," remains one of Ghana's most pressing environmental and socio-economic challenges. This article explores the potential of passing a Legislative Instrument (LI) or declaring a state of emergency to combat galamsey, weighing the pros and cons of each approach. It also provides actionable recommendations, referencing international standards and addressing the complexities of mining licenses issued before the New Patriotic Party (NPP) left office.

Overview and Context
Illegal mining has caused severe environmental degradation, including deforestation, water pollution, and the destruction of arable land. The Minerals Commission reported that hundreds of mining-related licenses were issued in the final days of the previous administration before President John Dramani Mahama assumed office. This raised concerns about transparency and governance in the mining sector.

Option 1: Passing a Legislative Instrument (LI)

Pros:
1. A structured and enforceable legal framework to regulate mining activities and impose penalties on violators.

2. Stakeholder engagement ensures inclusivity and transparency.

3. Incorporation of environmental protection measures aligned with international standards, such as the UN's Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

Cons:
1. Drafting and passing an LI can be a lengthy process, delaying immediate action.

2. Enforcement may remain weak without adequate resources and political will.

3. Resistance from stakeholders benefiting from galamsey.

Option 2: Declaring a State of Emergency

Pros:
1. Swift action allows the government to act decisively, bypassing bureaucratic delays.

2. Enables rapid deployment of resources, including security forces, to affected areas.

3. Underscores the severity of the crisis, galvanizing public support.

Cons:
1. Emergency measures may infringe on civil liberties, such as freedom of movement and assembly.

2. Suspension of democratic checks and balances increases the risk of power abuse.

3. Emergency measures are often short-term and may not address the root causes of galamsey.

Recommendations*
1. Combine the strengths of both options by passing an LI while using emergency measures for immediate interventions.

2. Conduct a comprehensive audit of the mining licenses issued before the NPP left office. Licenses found to be non-compliant with environmental and legal standards should be revoked.

3. Engage local communities, traditional leaders, and civil society organizations in decision-making and monitoring processes.

4. Develop programs to provide alternative income sources for individuals dependent on galamsey.

5. Align policies with global best practices, such as the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI), to ensure accountability and sustainability.

6. Strengthen the capacity of regulatory bodies like the Minerals Commission and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to enforce laws effectively.

Conclusion
The fight against galamsey requires a multi-faceted approach that balances immediate action with long-term sustainability. By leveraging both legislative instruments and emergency measures, Ghana can protect its environment, uphold the rule of law, and ensure a brighter future for its citizens. Success hinges on transparency, accountability, and the collective will of all stakeholders. Parliamentarians, including John Abu Jinapor, must prioritize the enactment of this law rather than obstructing progress. His tenure oversaw significant destruction of farmlands and forest reserves, and it is time to focus on solutions rather than undermining efforts to address this critical issue.

Retired Senior Citizen
Teshie-Nungua