In Burkina Faso, mercury and cyanide, highly toxic chemicals used in mineral processing, are ending up in the country’s surface and groundwater, condemning current and future generations to terrible water problems and a health catastrophe. The experts are unanimous: Burkina Faso does not currently have the technical capacity to clean up water contaminated with heavy metals. The “polluter pays” principle, legally enshrined since 2009, is still not in force for lack of an implementing decree. The result? Burkina’s water resources are continually being polluted with impunity!
Gold production has enabled Burkina Faso to become a mining giant, ranking 5th in Africa behind South Africa, Ghana, Mali and Sudan. Indeed, gold produced industrially in Burkina Faso contributed 14.30% to government revenue in 2020, compared with 19.50% in 2021, according to reports by the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative of Burkina Faso (EITI-BF). However, this record has a downside: the excessive pollution of the country’s water resources by highly toxic products such as mercury and cyanide, as confirmed by studies.
“For every gram of gold obtained by amalgamation, around two grams of mercury escape into the surrounding environment, directly polluting soil, water and air,” states the National Water Policy document, published in March 2015 by the Ministry of Agriculture, Water Resources, Sanitation and Food Security.
The same document adds that “Mining in Burkina Faso has negative repercussions on the environment, whatever the method of exploitation… The risk of environmental degradation resulting from mining activities remains one of the highest, whether they are carried out on the surface or at depth”.
A previous study entitled “Analyse économique du secteur des mines, liens pauvreté et environnement” (“Economic analysis of the mining sector, poverty and environment links”) by the Ministry for the Environment and the Quality of Life (ministère de l’Environnement et du Cadre de Vie – MECV), dated May 2011, states: “In mines, the use of highly toxic products (mercury, cyanide) for the amalgamation and cyanidation of gold greatly increases water pollution”.
In a study entitled “Mining makes us poor”: Industrial mining in Burkina Faso and published in December 2018 by GLOCON Country Report, authors Franza Drechsel, Bettina Engels and Mirka Schäfer state that “Mining also has considerable impacts on the environment, such as… contamination of surface water and groundwater”.
However, more than a decade ago, the legislator provided for water management mechanisms with a dual role: to protect water resources against all types of nuisance, including pollution, and to ensure the long-term financing of actions to safeguard and restore these water resources. The “polluter pays” principle was introduced by law in 2009.
But almost 15 years later, this principle is still not enforceable against offenders, due to the lack of an implementing decree. Burkina’s water resources are continually polluted with impunity. The Water Agencies are deprived of a source of endogenous funding to properly carry out their mission of protecting and safeguarding the country’s water resources.
The “polluter pays” principle is inoperative, and water resources are at risk!
Since 1998, Burkina Faso has been committed to sustainable management of its blue gold through the principle of Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM). In 2001, it adopted law no. 002-2001/AN of 08 February on the orientation law for water management, which had the merit of establishing the principle of financing the water sector through a parafiscal tax. In 2009, law no. 058-2009/AN of 15 December 2009 was passed, introducing a parafiscal tax known as the ” Water Financial Contribution” (Contribution Financière en matière d’Eau – CFE) for the benefit of water agencies.
This tax has three components: a tax on the abstraction of raw water, in line with the “user pays” principle; a tax on water pollution, in line with the “polluter pays” principle; and a tax on changes to the water regime. According to Moustapha Congo, Technical Secretary for Integrated Water Resources Management, the CFE is a mechanism for “sovereign and sustainable financing of measures to protect and safeguard Burkina Faso’s water resources”.
But of the three components of the CFE, “only the ‘user pays’ principle is operational”, says Wendemi Cyprien Tizambo, Director General of the Directorate General for Water Resources (Direction générale des ressources en eau – DGRE). The other two, including the polluter-pays principle, have not been applied for lack of an implementing decree. In the nearly 15 years since the law establishing it was passed in 2009, the principle of punishing the pollution of water resources has still not been applied. David Moyenga, an expert and civil engineer in water engineering, deplores this situation.
In his view, Burkina Faso, which has “very few water resources”, is seeing this “very limited resource massively polluted with heavy metals”. And yet, according to the expert, Burkina Faso does not have the technology to deal with this “deluge of heavy metal pollution” caused by “industrial mining and gold panning”.
However, according to Nadine Nare/Ouerce, a legal expert at the Technical Secretariat for Integrated Water Management (ST/GIRE), the “polluter pays” principle means that anyone who pollutes water resources for financial gain must contribute to national efforts to restore these resources by paying a fee.
Firmin Ouédraogo, a lawyer and ST/GIRE studies and analysis adviser, adds that the purpose of this principle is to “prevent a serious water crisis”, in particular massive pollution, and “to ensure perpetual funding of measures to protect and safeguard water resources”. Unfortunately, the cost of inaction in the face of pollution is costing the country, at the very least, 11 billion FCFA, according to the 2016 parliamentary enquiry report on the management of mining titles.
Resistance from mining companies, perseverance from water agencies, permissiveness from certain authorities
Mining companies are opposed to the application of the CFE. Indeed, after the decree setting the rates and collection procedures for the raw water extraction tax was adopted in 2011, the mining companies, through their umbrella organisation, the Chamber of Mines, opposed its application.
During a CFE collection accountability activity organised by the ST/GIRE in September 2018, public agents responsible for collection acknowledged that “some mining companies refuse to pay and others even say they do not recognise it”. On the mining operators’ side, Toussaint Bamouni, Executive Director of the Chamber of Mines, who agreed to answer our questions about the CFE in his office in 2019, said that the “stability clause to which the State has subscribed” forbids other taxes being added to the companies’ charges. This is why the mining companies were opposed to the CFE, according to him.
During the accountability workshop in Kaya, Firmin Ouédraogo pointed out that the mining companies had initially demanded a revision of the cost of extraction per m³, initially set at 200 FCFA by Decree No. 2011-445 of 18 July 2011 for large extractors such as the mining industries. In the meantime, however, the decree was repealed following lobbying by the mining magnates.
Indeed, after four years of negotiation, the mining giants succeeded in getting the government to back down and adopt Decree No. 2015-1475 of 07 December 2015, reducing the 200 FCFA to 125 FCFA per m³. According to Firmin Ouédraogo, the 125 FCFA per m³ was set after a study showed that even the previous cost (editor’s note: FCFA 200 per m3) was advantageous for the mining companies.
Unfortunately, this rebate did not have the desired effect. Mining companies have continued to challenge the CFE. Thus, in its 2017 annual review, the Chamber of Mines of Burkina Faso is still pleading for “the revision of the rate and scope of the CFE”.
Lobbying initially consisted of not recognising the CFE as a whole, citing the stability clause. CFE collection agents tell us that after a tug of war with the Water Agencies, some companies have finally recognised the CFE but never declare the quantities of water they abstract or, when they do declare, refuse to pay the amounts due. This makes it impossible for collectors to collect the amounts due.
David Moyenga even notes that pressure was brought to bear on decision-makers not to adopt the implementing regulations. He personally experienced this with the last adoption of the Mining Code in 2015… Officials at the Ministry of Water acknowledge that the hostile attitude of mining companies towards the CFE influenced the failure to adopt the decree applying the “polluter pays” principle.
As well as polluting water resources with impunity, the government is struggling to collect the “polluter pays” tax because the executive has failed to adopt the implementing decree. This lobbying increased in 2015 when the transition launched the process of revising the Mining Code.
As part of this work, we contacted the Chamber of Mines via its communications manager, Cyril ZONGO. He asked us to send them a letter requesting an interview, together with a questionnaire. We did so, but no response was forthcoming by the time we had completed our story, despite our repeated reminders.
According to Firmin Ouedraogo, the mining companies’ protest stance has been encouraged by the permissiveness of certain state authorities who have helped these companies “to violate the CFE regulations in force”. For example, in letter FO/IS/083/10/2012 dated 24 October 2012, sent to the then Minister of Agriculture and Hydraulics, Laurent Sedogo, the then Managing Director of Bissa gold, Dr Christian F. Ouedraogo, requested “exemption for the abstraction of raw water”.
Minister Laurent Sedogo, in letter No. 881/MAH/SG/DGRE dated 27 December 2012, had replied: “… Further to correspondence No. 012-0942-MCE/CAB from the Minister of Mines, Quarries and Energy on the notice of your request for exemption from payment of the said tax, I record my favourable opinion of your request for exemption from payment of the water abstraction tax”.
However, legal experts in the tax administration believe that the Minister did not have the power to override a decree to grant such an exemption. Incensed by his predecessors’ stance, Water Minister Niouga Ambroise Ouédraogo (2019 to 2021) insisted in 2020 that “the position of the Ministry in charge of water is clear: the CFE is a parafiscal tax that all taxpayers must pay, in accordance with the decree in force… Our laws must be respected by everyone”.
Poura and Kalsaka, martyrs of whom little is said
Burkina Faso is not a country rich in water resources. Fulgence T. Ki, former technical adviser to the Ministry of Water, points out that “most of Burkina Faso’s water resources come from rainfall”, and that this water flows to neighbouring countries such as Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana. Pascal Nakohoun, Director of Water Studies and Information at the Ministry of Water, says: “Our country receives around 200 billion m³ of water in the form of rain, but we don’t even retain more than 10 billion”.
But the greatest threat to the little water that remains is the behaviour of users, including mining operators. Poura, Burkina Faso’s first industrial mine, operated by the Burkina Mining Research Company (Société de Recherche d’Exploitation Minière du Burkina – SOREMIB), in the Boucle du Mouhoun region, is a perfect illustration.
Closed since 1999, the open cyanide pit covers an area of around half a hectare, causing great concern among local people. To limit the risks associated with the toxicity of the site’s mine tailings, in 2014 the Mouhoun Water Agency, with the support of Poura town council, erected a makeshift fence to prevent the reddish water from the tailings from running off the site. The fence is starting to show signs of wear and tear. These days, the chemical waste continues to give off a strong stench as soon as you approach it.
Referring to the harmful effects of this ferry, Water and Forestry Lieutenant Basile Kaboré cites “water, soil and even air pollution”. The ferry is located five kilometres from the Mouhoun river, Burkina Faso’s largest watercourse, which flows through the Boucle du Mouhoun, Hauts-Bassins and Cascades regions and continues on to Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana. It is the source of drinking water for major towns such as Bobo-Dioulasso, Banfora and Dédougou.
Because the site is so dangerous, the Mouhoun Water Agency (Agence de l’Eau du Mouhoun – AEM) has put up signs prohibiting access. The signs read in large letters and bright red: “Access forbidden”, accompanied by the image of a skull and crossbones, symbolising the danger of death.
The Mouhoun Water Agency has gone further, if we are to believe the words of Saidou Kanazoé, former Director General of the Mouhoun Water Agency (in GIRE Info n°001 October-December 2017): “We took water samples from boreholes and analysed the physico-chemical parameters using approved laboratories. It turned out that some boreholes were contaminated. We approached the mayor with these results to explain that it was not a good idea to let people continue to drink water from these boreholes and that it was wise to find an alternative. The mayor understood and the boreholes were closed”.
The former mayor of Poura, Seydou Traoré, was very angry, and stated bluntly that SOREMIB had left a legacy of negative consequences on the Poura site, where the wealthiest people only drink mineral water. Seydou Diao, president of the local livestock farmers, recalls that “several dozen animals died after drinking the water”, which he is convinced was contaminated with chemicals from the mining operation.
Poura is far from being an isolated case. The Kalsaka gold mine (northern region), operated from 2008 to 2013 by Kalsaka Mining SA, is also affected. “Kalsaka is an environmental disaster”, says Jonas Hien, Executive Secretary of the NGO ORCADE. In this locality, the quality of the water is a constant concern for the inhabitants.
Under their pressure, the mine took water samples for analysis. But “no one was ever able to see the results of the analyses, which were kept secret”, points out the former mayor of Kalsaka, Adama Ouédraogo. To avoid any health problems, in 2018 the mayor of Kalsaka issued a decree closing a large well in the village of Tapré, which was strongly suspected of being contaminated with cyanide.
Negative consequences of cyanide and mercury
Research is being carried out into the hazardous nature of cyanide in mining. In his Master’s thesis, entitled “Environmental and health risks at gold panning sites in Burkina Faso: life cycle of the main pollutants and perceptions of gold panners (case study of the Zougnazagmligne site in the rural commune of Bouroum, Centre-Nord region)”, Joël Roamba states that “cyanide does not bioaccumulate in living organisms. It acts directly as a poison”.
He goes on to reveal that “in general, 0.3 to 0.5 g of cyanide are needed for one tonne of ore, but in practice, manufacturers use 300 to 2,000 g of cyanide per tonne of ore for more efficient extraction”.
The Minamata Initial Assessment Report of June 2018 assessed mercury discharges into the waters of Burkina. Based on data provided by six mining companies, this report assesses mining’s responsibility for mercury pollution of waters at 34.98%. The study states that “gold extraction by mercury amalgamation without the use of retorts” amounts to “6,310.7 kg Hg/year”.
According to water expert David Moyenga, mercury, once in water, can last for around 70 years. In his view, the presence of heavy metals in water and soil represents a major threat to biodiversity and a source of public health problems for humans. Animals that drink contaminated water will develop diseases, and humans who consume it are also exposed.
The expert points out that the presence of these metals in the body leads to health problems such as disruption of the nervous system, damage to brain function, DNA and chromosomes, allergic reactions, skin rashes, fatigue, headaches, a negative influence on reproduction and cardiovascular disease. He adds that treatment for most of the illnesses caused by these products is beyond the reach of the overwhelming majority of Burkina Faso’s population.
The 2016 Parliamentary Inquiry Report cites proven cases of pollution of water resources. Indeed, it states that: “The tailings pond of the Bélahouro mining company is said to have collapsed, causing animals to die…; … animals have died as a result of consuming water or grass; many water points (surface water and boreholes) and pastures are contaminated, and have led to the death of animals (cattle, goats…) in the Sahel region at Gaskindé, at Gomdé Fulbe and Mossi (communes of Tongomayel and Koutougou), in Gorom Gorom, in the East region in Fada, in the South-West region and in the Boucle du Mouhoun”.
The same MPs’ report refers to the use of cyanide and mercury on gold-mining sites, particularly at Gosey and Banadiara. According to the MEPs, the use of these products has led to the appearance of certain diseases that were once eradicated, such as anthrax, and unexplained animal deaths (vulture and fish poisoning in 2014). Mining sites that have been abandoned due to the end of operations (Kalsaka, Poura) or suspension (Tambao), and many others, are virtually “crimes against the environment”, emphasises the parliamentary investigation report.
Investigation carried out by Hamidou TRAORE with the support of the Norbert Zongo Unit for Investigative Journalism in West Africa (CENOZO).
TEXT BOX A proven weakness in environmental protection in the mining sector Environmental specialists believe that failure to apply the “polluter pays” principle is only one aspect of the deterioration of the environment. David Moyenga deplores the fact that the government has not put in place an effective system for controlling and monitoring these mines to ensure compliance with environmental legislation, despite the experience of Burkina Faso, which has had at least 19 mines in operation to date. He cites as an example the case of the Perkoa mine, where 08 workers lost their lives after a flood in April 2022. The judicial investigation of the case revealed a series of negligent acts and repeated violations of the rules and basic requirements of health and safety at work. On the infrastructure side, a public administration laboratory technician, who requested anonymity, is adamant that, due to a lack of resources, Burkina Faso does not have a substantial system for drawing up a “reference report on the situation of heavy metal pollution at national level” and dealing with it effectively. He points out that the “laboratories are under-equipped in terms of human resources, finance and suitable equipment”. As proof of this, he points to the absence in the country’s laboratories of state-of-the-art equipment such as the “ICP MS”, which could cost up to 250 million. According to our laboratory technician, this equipment is essential if we want to know the real level of pollution in a water resource. Among other things, it can detect the slightest pollutant in water. A study entitled “Environmental and social assessment of the mining sector, a strategic approach to improving environmental and social management in the mining sector” (“Évaluation environnementale et sociale du secteur minier, Approche stratégique en vue de l’amélioration de la gestion environnementale et sociale du secteur minier”) by the Ministry of Mines and Energy (January 2014) corroborates the opinion of environmental experts in a few points: “Environmental protection has never been a priority for successive governments. Environmental management exists only on paper and in response to external pressure (United Nations, World Bank, NGOs). The budget allocation for environmental protection, and in particular for environmental assessment, remains low. The Ministry of the Environment has constantly changed direction and structure over the past 20 years. Lobbying by mining companies means that there are few resources for monitoring. There is a lack of knowledge or general interest in environmental protection. As a result, environmental and social monitoring of the mining sector is virtually non-existent, there is no data on the environmental and social risks faced by mining companies, and National Environmental Assessment Office (Bureau national des évaluations environnementales – BUNEE) has little capacity to carry out its legally defined mandate.
