Zimbabwe villagers challenge construction of Chinese cement plant in their area

Villagers from Kapere and Chasara in Hurungwe have urgently appealed to the Ministry of Environment, calling for the cancellation of an Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) certificate issued to Labenmon Investments, a Chinese company planning to establish a cement manufacturing plant in their area.

Represented by Zimbabwe Human Rights Lawyers Tinashe Chinopfukutwa and Kelvin Kabaya, the villagers submitted a formal letter to Environment Minister Sithembiso Nyoni, expressing their concerns and demanding immediate action.

The controversy began when Labenmon Investments arrived in the two villages in July 2024, marking and fencing off a significant area in Magunje, Katenhe under ward 11. The land in question includes vital grazing fields and farming plots, affecting approximately 23 families who depend on these resources for their livelihoods.

"The villagers later learned that Labenmon Investments was going to establish a cement manufacturing plant on the pegged area, effectively prohibiting them from accessing their grazing fields and farming land," stated the Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights (ZLHR) in a press release.

The villagers assert that they were not consulted about the EIA submission or the issuance of the certificate, which they claim was improperly granted to Wih-Zim Construction Investments Cement Manufacturing, a company linked to Labenmon Investments.

In their appeal, Chinopfukutwa and Kabaya argue that the Director-General of the Environmental Management Agency (EMA) acted unlawfully by issuing the EIA certificate before reviewing the necessary EIA report, thereby violating sections 100(1) and 100(2) of the Environmental Management Act. They maintain that the Director-General should have considered the EIA report before granting the certificate.

Moreover, the lawyers highlighted the lack of public consultation regarding the proposed cement manufacturing plant, which contravenes section 136 of the Environmental Management Act. "The Director-General of EMA violated the principles of natural justice by failing to consult the appellants and allowing them an opportunity to be heard," they emphasized.

They further contended that even if Labenmon Investments had submitted an EIA report, the Director-General erred by not consulting with the affected villagers and other relevant stakeholders before approving the report and issuing the EIA certificate, thus breaching section 100(3)(c) of the Environmental Management Act.

The appeal also points out that the Director-General neglected to exercise his powers under section 100(2)(c) of the Environmental Management Act by not inviting the developers of the cement plant and interested parties to a consultative meeting as required.

Additionally, Chinopfukutwa and Kabaya noted that the EIA certificate issued did not meet the requirements of section 100(5) of the Environmental Management Act, as it failed to specify the registered address of Labenmon Investments.

The villagers' urgent appeal highlights the need for proper consultation and adherence to environmental regulations to protect their livelihoods and the local ecosystem from potentially harmful industrial developments.