DRC Civil Society Raises Concerns Over Draft Directive on Mining Community Funds

DRC Civil Society Warns New Mining Fund Directive Could Undermine Local Development and Decentralisation

Civil society organisations in the Democratic Republic of Congo have raised serious concerns over a draft supplementary directive governing the management of the 0.3% mining revenue allocation, warning that the proposed reforms could undermine local development and weaken decentralisation.

In an open letter dated March 18, 2026, addressed to the Ministers of Social Affairs and Mines, the organisations acknowledged the urgent need to improve the management of the fund so that it effectively supports sustainable development in mining communities, in line with the objectives of the revised 2018 Mining Code.

However, they expressed “deep concern” over the draft directive, arguing that instead of addressing existing shortcomings, it risks creating new operational challenges particularly through increased centralisation and a more complex project approval process at the national level.

Persistent Governance Failures

The organisations stated that, like the Court of Auditors, they have identified significant dysfunctions in the management of the fund.

These include:

• The appointment of state representatives from Kinshasa to local management bodies
• Inefficient and inconsistent allocation of funds
• Delays in project approvals by the Supervisory Committee
• Non-compliance with public procurement rules

Additional concerns highlighted include weak oversight of project implementation, poor alignment of projects with local development plans, and limited involvement of local authorities and communities in project selection.

Concerns Over Centralisation

Civil society groups argue that these issues call for reforms that enhance transparency, accountability, and decentralisation rather than increased central control.

They warn that excessive centralisation of project validation contradicts the principles of decentralisation enshrined in the Mining Code, particularly provisions that assign management of the fund to community representatives and mining operators.

According to the organisations, centralising decision-making at the national level risks weakening local governance structures and slowing the delivery of development projects intended to benefit mining-affected communities.

Criticism of Proposed Institutional Changes

The draft directive also proposes the creation of a permanent technical secretariat under the Supervisory Committee, comprising several specialised units. Civil society groups argue that this would significantly increase administrative complexity and financial burdens.

They caution that the expanded structure could:

• Strain the limited operational budget allocated to oversight functions
• Reduce resources available for effective project monitoring
• Undermine the principle of subsidiarity by shifting authority away from local entities

The organisations further criticised a proposal to assign specialised bodies responsibility for managing infrastructure and sectoral projects such as health, education, energy, and agriculture.

They argue that this approach contradicts decentralisation principles, which place local authorities and decentralised territorial entities at the centre of development planning and implementation.

According to the groups, such a shift could distort the role of these bodies, transforming them into quasi-public institutions and creating risks of inefficiency, increased costs, and institutional overlap.

Risk to Community Development Objectives

Civil society organisations warn that if adopted in its current form, the directive could make project approval more restrictive and subject to complex administrative and technical requirements.

Rather than facilitating development, these measures could delay or block access to funds intended for communities affected by mining activities, ultimately undermining the purpose of the 0.3% revenue allocation.

They describe the draft as a paradox intended to improve governance and streamline processes, yet likely to create additional barriers and distance decision-making from local communities.

Call for Inclusive Reform

The organisations recommend revising existing management tools, including the Procedures Manual and the Supervisory Committee’s internal regulations, to better align with the provisions and spirit of the Mining Code.

They are calling on the government to initiate inclusive and transparent consultations involving all stakeholders, including government institutions, the Chamber of Mines, and civil society.

According to the groups, any corrective measures should:

• Align with the Mining Code and prior stakeholder agreements
• Strengthen decentralisation by shifting project validation to provincial and local levels
• Preserve the central government’s oversight role without undermining local autonomy

They also suggest that existing frameworks used in mining companies’ social responsibility programmes could serve as a model for improving fund governance.

A Call for a Balanced Approach

The signatories emphasised that only a collaborative and transparent reform process will ensure that the fund fulfils its intended purpose as a driver of inclusive and sustainable development in mining regions.

They argue that respecting the principles of subsidiarity and community participation is essential to maintaining stakeholder trust and ensuring that mining revenues deliver tangible benefits to local populations.

The open letter was signed by several prominent civil society figures, including Maître Jean Keba, Maître Jean Pierre Okenda, and Dr Joseph Cihunda.