2. Protection of the communities’ land rights

JINDAL has been the subject of disputes and accusations by affected communities and a significant number of non-governmental organizations, including academics who have claimed and denounced human rights violations – particularly land rights and housing rights of the communities in question – in a context where there is a clear lack of evidence of improvements in the living conditions of these communities as a result of their exploitation of mineral coal. Besides JA, among these organizations 5 are also the Mozambican Human Rights League (Liga Moçambicana dos Direitos Humanos), the Mozambican Bar Association (Ordem dos Advogados de Moçambique) 6 , the Public Integrity Centre (Centro de Integridade Pública) 7 , various platforms of civil society organizations on the extractive industry, among others.

Jindal - A Classic Example of Corporate Impunity

To better understand the legality and sustainability of this process, JA addressed several letters to the Ministry of Land, Environment and Rural Development (Ministério da Terra Ambiente e Desenvolvimento Rural – MITADER), to the governmental institution that preceded it and was designated Ministry for Coordination of Environmental Action (Ministério para a Coordenação da Acção Ambiental – MICOA) and to the Office of the National Directorate of Environmental Impact Assessment (Direcção Nacional de Avaliação de Impacto Ambiental – DNAIA), requesting the full content of JINDAL’s Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), as well its respective certificate of approval.

On the 28 th of August 2013, a meeting was held between JA and the then Minister of MICOA, who was accompanied by a team that also included

5

6 7 Justiça Ambiental, the Mozambican Human Rights League and the Mozambican Bar Association submitted proceedings in the administrative jurisdiction in order to hold JINDAL and the Mozambican State responsible for violations of the rights of the communities affected by the coal project in Tete. See Report of the Mozambican Bar Association on Human Rights in Mozambique for the year 2015 and 2016. See publications of the Public Integrity Centre available at https://cipmoz.org/index.php/pt/industria-extractiva

Mozambican justice and the rights of the communities affected by the activities of Jindal Mozambique Minerais, Ltd the then Director of DNAIA. At this meeting, JA received confirmation that JINDAL did not have an approved EIA, and that, in fact, its process was at the Environmental Pre-feasibility Study and Scope and Terms of Reference for the EIA elaboration phase. This means that JINDAL was in violation of Article 16 of Law 20/97, Environment Law, of October 1 st ; of the repealed Decree 45/2004 of September 29 th , as well as of the current Decree 54/2015 of December 1 st , which advocate the obligation to have the EIA finalized and approved before any company starts its activities.

In order to formalize the information provided to us at the meeting and due to the lack of evidence supporting the existence of the EIA, on the 11 th of October 2013, JA sent a new letter to MICOA and DNAIA requesting information about JINDAL’s EIA, but the request did not get any response.

On the 6 th of August 2014, JA sends another letter on the subject to the same authorities and, on the 13 th of August 2014, DNAIA finally responds. In its reply, it states that the EIA is owned by JINDAL, and therefore it could only be consulted in DNAIA’s premises and that it could never provide any copies of the document.

On the 3 rd of September 2014, JA responds appealing that the Law on the Right to Information is respected, arguing that the Law guarantees the passage of documents to the interested parties provided that it does not contain classified, confidential or secret information. JA also argues that consulting the EIA at DNAIA’s premises would not allow for proper analysis and discussion of the documents in question. Moreover, JA explains that, above all, what was intended was to have the EIA in its entirety and the whole process duly approved.

Over the following four years, JA held some meetings and established some telephone contacts with MITADER’s technical staff to obtain the desired information, but it did not work.

By the end of 2018 – already during the process of finalizing this study – the mere existence of JINDAL’s EIA remained questionable. Then, on the 29 th of November 2018, JA sends another letter to MITADER and DNAIA asking them to confirm the existence of this EIA, as well as the date of its approval. Once again, JA requests copies of the documentation.

In a reply dated December 3 rd 2018, DNAIA informed JA that JINDAL had in fact an EIA and that it had been approved by MITADER, reiterating that it could only be consulted in DNAIA’s premises.

That being said, on the 13 th of December 2018, a team from JA went to DNAIA to consult JINDAL’s EIA documentation, seeking to clarify as many issues as possible, including those regarding its submission and approval. From the analysis of the

documents that were provided, it was only possible to verify that JINDAL’s Environmental Impact Assessment Report was submitted to DNAIA on the 17 th of February 2012. However, we were not provided with any document related to the EIA’s approval, and when we asked for this documentation, DNAIA replied that – because it was an old process – they would have to look in the archives and it might take a few days for them to be made available.

Jindal - A Classic Example of Corporate Impunity

Mozambican justice and the rights of the communities affected by the activities of Jindal Mozambique Minerais, Ltd

Jindal - A Classic Example of Corporate Impunity

Regarding the non-compliance of the resettlement plan 3

Mozambican justice and the rights of the communities affected by the activities of Jindal Mozambique Minerais, Ltd