The amount of gold production reported by DGSM is low compared to gold that was exported as reported by Uganda Revenue Authority. DGSM says URA should explain where the extra gold that was exported came from.
Gloria Mugambe,Head of the Uganda EITI Secretariate speaking during the launch of the report about transparency in Uganda's extractive's industry
The Uganda Extractive‘s
Industries Transparency Initiative Secretariat (UGEITI Secretariat) has again raised a red
flag about the discrepancies in the country’s gold import and exports.
UGEITI Secretariat hosted by the Ministry
of Finance on Thursday release its report for Fiscal Year 2021/2022. Like in the previous reports, the variations
between the figures of gold exports reported by Uganda Revenue Authority
greatly vary with reports by the Department of Geological Surveys and Mines (DGSM)
According to the new
report, there has also been unexplained jump in earnings from minerals. During
the 2020/2021 report, UGEITI said production of minerals was worth 19 billion
shillings. In the current report, it said production in minerals was worth 202
billion shillings.
“We want to understand
what is driving the jump. We can see that the amount of gold production
reported by DGSM is low compared to gold that was exported. So some interesting
dynamics that we need to look at” said Mugambe
All gold exports from Uganda are supposed to be cleared by the Directorate of Geological Surveys and Mines(DGS) . DGSM has therefore insisted that Uganda Revenue Authority has the responsibility to report the source of the extra god exported during the reporting period.
That discrepancy
has raised concerns about transparency with in government departments in the
Mineral’s sector particularly on amount of gold being produced in country.
UGEITI identified
a number of gaps in the data currently available for the sector including
estimates on the informal mining sector’s contribution.
Some have
suggested Uganda is a regional hub for illicit gold smuggled from elsewhere in
East Africa, for onward export to gold trade hubs such as the United Arab
Emirates (UAE).
As a result of this gold smuggling, Uganda’s gold exports have
grown exponentially since the 1990s and are now the highest in the region.
The Uganda Revenue
Authority (URA) recorded gold exports from refineries valued at UGX 6.3
billion, compared to imports reported by one refinery of just UGX 1.3 billion.
Meanwhile, the Directorate of Geological Survey and Mines (DGSM) reported gold
production at only 15 kilograms, sparking questions about the origin of the
excess exports.
"Accuracy of
export data and a detailed analysis of the gold value chain remain key
recommendations from the first and second EITI reports," the latest EITI
report, reviewing the 2021/2022 financial year, states
Gloria Kempaka
Mugambe, the head of Secretariat at Uganda Extractive Industries Transparency
Initiative (UGEITI) notes that the figures simply do not add up.
She added that
either industry players are under reporting production or unregulated channels
are facilitating the movement of minerals in and out of the country.
“Upon further
investigation and discussions with the Uganda Revenue Authority (URA), we
understand that some imports are not being accurately captured by their system.
This issue seems to contribute to the gap observed in the data. This
discrepancy is essential for a more accurate representation of gold trade
statistics,” she said
In an attempt to
explain these discrepancies, some officials suggest that the reported gold may
be entering the country through undocumented means, primarily from neighboring
countries, particularly the Democratic Republic of Congo.
However, artisanal
miners have a different perspective.
Emmanuel kibirige, the National
Coordinator of the Uganda Association of Artisanal and Small-Scale Miners
argues that the gold in question is not illicitly sourced from other countries,
as often believed. Instead, he explains, much of the gold is locally produced
by artisanal miners.
"Given that
the system has failed to adequately support artisanal miners, they continue to
operate informally, without declaring their gold," he said. "The gold
is sold to buyers and eventually makes its way to refineries."
Earnings from
gold produced within the country should be used to improve the economic and social
wellbeing of Ugandans.
David Sebagala,
Senior Inspector of Mines at the Ministry of Energy, partly agrees with
Kibirige, stating that much of the mineral production by Artisan miners remains
largely undocumented.
"By nature, these artisanal miners
prefer to operate in unconventional ways, even when it's not necessary."
Artisanal and small-scale
mining (ASGM) contributes to more than 90% of Uganda's gold production. Many
ASGM miners work with very small amounts of gold (less than 1 gram) and
commonly use mercury for extraction.
Key districts involved in Artisan gold mining include
Buhweju, Amudat, Moroto, Busia, Namayingo, Kassanda, and Kisoro.
This issue is not
limited to gold alone. The discrepancy between mineral production and exports
is also seen in other minerals like vermiculite and zinc, which are not
reported as part of the country's mineral production.
Another major
problem in the sector is the continued export of unprocessed minerals despite a ban by President Museveni.
In
2015, the President instituted a ban on unprocessed minerals in an effort to
promote local industries, encourage value addition, and create jobs for Ugandans.
However, according
to reports from the Uganda Revenue Authority (URA), many of the banned minerals
have continued to be exported.
For example, vermiculite exports amounted to 12
billion shillings, and iron ore exports reached 919 million shillings. Other
minerals, including zinc, kaolin, and tantalite, have also been exported. The
main export destinations have been the USA, Spain, Kenya, the UK, Canada, and
Belgium.
Sebagala
acknowledges the ban but mentions that sometimes investors are granted waivers.
He is certain that this happened with vermiculite.
He explains that the
discrepancy between production and exports of vermiculite could be due to
stockpiles held by companies before the ban was enacted. When export permission
is granted, these companies export their existing stockpiles, which may not
have been recorded as production.
"This
explains the lack of production records for such minerals," Sebagala
notes, "as companies are exporting what they already had in stock."
However, Sebagala
emphasizes that for other minerals, beyond vermiculite, a proper explanation is
needed to clarify how they left the country. "Someone in charge should be
able to explain this," he adds.
Under the new
mining law, Sebagala explains, no one is allowed to export any mineral without
the knowledge of the Directorate of Geological Survey and Mines (DGSM).
Exporters must present an export permit to URA before clearance is given.
"Going
forward, we do not expect conflicting figures with URA, as the law requires an
export permit issued by the DGSM. With this permit, we can track the tonnage
and the specific minerals being exported. This means that banned minerals
cannot be exported unless cleared," he concludes.
The EITI international
Board in May this year called on Uganda to reconcile gold the discrepancies in
gold export and production.
The board said Uganda
must publish estimates of informal mineral exports volumes and values, in order
to fulfill the objective of providing a basis for addressing export related
issues in the mining sector. It is recommended that the government entities
comprehensively disclose and harmonise export data.
Uganda is also encouraged
to describe the methods for calculating export volumes and values with a view
to supporting improvements in the government’s oversight of mineral exports. To
strengthen implementation of