By Mary Taruvinga
Villagers from Kapere and Chasara villages in Hurungwe have mounted an urgent appeal with the Environment ministry seeking to stop Labenmon Investments, a Chinese entity from setting up a cement manufacturing plant in their area.
The villagers who are represented by Zimbabwe Human Rights Lawyers, Tinashe Chinopfukutwa and Kelvin Kabaya have written a letter to the Environment minister, Sithembiso Nyoni asking her to cancel the company’s Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) certificate.
According to the villagers, Labenmon Investments, arrived in the two villages sometime in July 2024 and began pegging and fencing off the area in Magunje, Katenhe area under ward 11.
The affected area included the grazing fields and farming land and about 23 families are affected.
“The villagers later learnt that Labenmon Investments, was going to establish a cement manufacturing plant on the pegged area and they were prohibited from accessing their grazing fields and farming land by the mining company,” said ZLHR in a statement.
They assert that they were never consulted over the submission of the EIA Report or the issuance of the certificate.
They claim the EIA was given to Wih-Zim Construction Investments Cement Manufacturing, which is linked to Labenmon Investments.
In the appeal, Kabaya and Chinopfukutwa argued that the Director-General of EMA erred at law by issuing Labenmon Investments with an EIA Certificate before receiving the mining company’s EIA Report in violation of section 100(1) and 100(2) of the Environmental Management Act.
The Director-General of EMA, Chinopfukutwa and Kabaya said, ought to have considered Labenmon Investments’ EIA Report first before issuing an EIA Certificate.”
The lawyers also argued that Labenmon Investments had not conducted any public consultations with the affected villagers on the proposed establishment of the cement manufacturing plant in violation of section 136 of the Environmental Management.
“The Director-General of EMA violated the principles of natural justice as espoused in section 136 of the Environmental Management Act by failing to consult the appellants who are affected by the proposed cement manufacturing plant and giving them an opportunity to be heard.
“Assuming Labenmon Investments submitted an EIA Report, the Director-General of EMA erred at law in issuing the EIA Certificate in circumstances where he failed to consult the appellants, relevant stakeholders and community members before approving the EIA Report and subsequently issuing the EIA Certificate in violation of section 100(3)(c) of the Environmental Management Act,” they said.
The Director-General of EMA, the lawyers said, failed to exercise his powers under section 100(2)(c) of the Environmental Management Act, by failing to invite the developers of the cement manufacturing plant and interested parties including the villagers, to a consultative meeting as required by the Environmental Management Act.
Chinopfukutwa and Kabaya pointed out that the Director-General of EMA erred at law in issuing an EIA Certificate that is contrary to the requirements of section 100(5) of the Environmental Management Act, arguing that the EIA Certificate does not specify the registered address of Labenmon Investments as required by section 100(5)(b) of the Environmental Management Act.