CSOs to Mahama: Fulfil promise to revoke L.I. 2462

A coalition of Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) has strongly opposed the amendment of Legislative Instrument (L.I.) 2462, calling for its complete revocation instead.
They argue that only a full ban on mining in forest reserves can effectively safeguard Ghana’s dwindling ecological zones.
The coalition, which includes A Rocha Ghana, EcoConscious Citizens, Ghana Coalition Against Galamsey, Nature and Development Foundation, Kasa Initiative Ghana, BRACE, Civic Response, and Tropenbos Ghana, insists that any legislative framework should prioritize sustainable forest management and environmental conservation over mining interests.

A broken promise
In a petition to asking the Parliamentary Select Committee On Subsidiary Legislation to reject the amended L.I. 2462, the CSOs accused the government of reneging on its commitments to entire revoke L.I. 2462.
They recall that during his political campaign, former President John Mahama pledged to revoke the law.
However, instead of abolishing it, the administration chose to modify it, effectively allowing mining to continue in forest reserves.

Amended L.I to mature in 21 days
The revised L.I. was laid before Parliament on March 20 and will automatically take effect after 21 sitting days unless rejected by the House.

Govt fears legal battles, judgment debts
Government sources argue that many mining firms have already made significant financial investments in their concessions, and revoking their licenses could trigger legal battles and costly judgment debts.

However, the CSOs counter that environmental sustainability and Ghana’s long-term ecological health should take precedence over short-term financial concerns.

The devastating impact of mining on Ghana’s forests
According to environmental experts, mining activities have already led to the destruction of 44 out of Ghana’s 288 forest reserves.
If L.I. 2462 is allowed to stand, even more reserves will be lost, further exacerbating deforestation and climate change impacts.

Before the introduction of L.I. 2462 in 2019
Before the introduction of L.I. 2462 in 2019, Ghana successfully protected its forests through the Environmental Guidelines for Mining in Production Forest Reserves.

Mining in forest reserves limited to 2% before L.I. 2462
These guidelines limited mining to a maximum of two per cent (2%) of all production forest reserves, ensuring a balance between economic activity and environmental preservation.

L.I. 2462 craps 2% limit
The new L.I., however, eliminates such restrictions, thereby opening the floodgates for extensive mining activities.
Permits approved by the Minerals Commission after the passage of L.I. 2462 have already paved the way for mining in significant portions of reserves such as Nkrabia, Boin Tano, Anhwiaso East, and Tano Anwia.
This policy shift marks a dangerous departure from Ghana’s prior commitments to sustainable development and forest conservation.

Legal and constitutional flaws in L.I. 2462
The CSOs argue that L.I. 2462 is unconstitutional and legally flawed.
They highlight that Act 490, which governs environmental protection in Ghana, does not grant the Minister the authority to regulate mining in forest reserves.
Additionally, they point out that a Legislative Instrument (L.I.) must be grounded in primary legislation, and L.I. 2462 lacks such a foundation.

Legitimacy of EPA overseeing mining activities questioned
They also question the legitimacy of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in overseeing mining activities, stating that this role falls under the purview of the Forestry and Minerals Commissions.
The EPA, they argue, was not established to manage natural resources, and its regulatory overreach in L.I. 2462 undermines constitutional directives.
Furthermore, L.I. 2462 introduces provisions that significantly alter the legal characteristics of forest reserves—an authority that, by law, belongs solely to the President through an Executive Instrument (E.I.).
Thus, the CSOs argue, an L.I. cannot override an E.I., making L.I. 2462 legally indefensible.

Revising the mining permit process
Under the previous Environmental Guidelines, mining companies were required to secure a Forest Entry Permit as the first step before pursuing any other permits.
This ensured that forest conservation remained a priority.
However, the new L.I. reverses this order, making the Mineral Rights Permit the primary requirement while relegating the Forest Entry Permit to a final step.
The CSOs argue that this shift is impractical, as it allows companies to invest heavily in mineral rights only to later discover they cannot obtain the necessary environmental clearance.
The coalition proposes reinstating the Forest Entry Permit as the first requirement and placing the Mineral Rights Permit last.
This change, they believe, would streamline the permitting process, prevent unnecessary financial losses, and uphold sustainable resource management principles.

Mining without prospecting: A dangerous oversight
Another major flaw in L.I. 2462 is its lack of provisions requiring mineral prospecting before granting mining leases.
Under the current framework, companies can bypass the prospecting phase entirely and apply directly for full mining leases, which, the CSOs argue, leads to inefficient and environmentally reckless mining practices.
Prospecting is a critical step in evaluating mineral deposits, assessing environmental impacts, and determining sustainable extraction methods.
By eliminating this requirement, L.I. 2462 allows mining companies to operate blindly, increasing the risk of irreversible ecological damage and resource mismanagement.

The biodiversity offset illusion
L.I. 2462 mandates that mining companies establish biodiversity offset areas three times the size of their mining concession.
While this may appear to be a conservation measure, the CSOs argue that it fails to ensure genuine forest restoration.
Instead of rehabilitating mined-out areas, companies are merely required to establish plantations, which lack the ecological richness and biodiversity of natural forests.
The CSOs emphasize that a true environmental protection law should mandate comprehensive reforestation and ecosystem restoration rather than allowing mining firms to offset their destruction with monoculture plantations.
Ghana’s forests provide critical ecosystem services, including clean air, water filtration, and climate regulation, all of which are severely compromised by mining activities.

A call for urgent legislative action
The CSOs maintain that L.I. 2462 represents a significant rollback in Ghana’s environmental protection policies.
Instead of strengthening conservation efforts, the regulation facilitates unchecked mining access to 100% of the nation’s forest reserves, placing these vital ecosystems in grave danger.
They call on Parliament to reject the amendment and instead work toward an Act that bans all forms of mining in forest reserves.
Such a move, they argue, would align with Ghana’s international commitments to climate change mitigation, protect rural communities dependent on forest resources, and preserve the nation’s environmental heritage for future generations.
In the face of increasing global climate concerns, the CSOs urge Ghana to take a bold stand against deforestation and destructive mining practices.
The protection of forest reserves is not just an environmental necessity—it is a matter of national interest and intergenerational responsibility.
Parliament must act decisively to revoke L.I. 2462 before irreversible damage is done to Ghana’s forests and the livelihoods they sustain.
By ELVIS DARKO, Accra