The \u201c1 000 Madoda\u201d, as they are known \u2014 so-called for supposedly accepting R1 000 each to act as the company\u2019s guards \u2013 have struck fear in the already divided community of Ga-Mphahlele. There, a clash over the mine has intersected with a historical leadership dispute around the chieftaincy, resulting in violent protests.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Dithabeng Mining, owned by tobacco baron Adriano Mazzotti and his associates, has been accused by some in the community of operating unlawfully, in cahoots with the chief, his mother and a faction of the traditional leadership.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Critics of the mine accuse the chief, Malekutu Phatudi-Mphahlele, and his mother and predecessor, Ngwanamohube Phatudi-Mphahlele, of staging a power-grab and cutting a deal with Dithabeng\u2019s owners behind the community\u2019s back.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Dithabeng denies this, saying that it has at all times been dealing with what it understands is the legally constituted traditional authority.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Mazzotti, a friend and financial backer of EFF leader Julius Malema, is a controversial figure, with allegations regarding illicit tobacco trading and tax evasion hanging over him.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Ga-Mphahlele Traditional Authority \u2014 the chiefly leadership \u2014 said in response to questions that \u201cthere was a legal process which was followed to the fullest\u201d and that \u201ceverything regarding the deal with Dithabeng Mining was done above board\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Dithabeng denies acting unlawfully in any way. It said via its lawyers, Nicqui Galaktiou Inc<\/a>: \u201cDithabeng Mining is a black majority owned and managed company. It holds the community of Mphahlele in high regard and particularly focuses on social investment and environmental conservation within the region.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cDithabeng\u2019s corporate social responsibility and community development are prioritised as this plays a critical role in the company\u2019s relationship with the community and its employees.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Dithabeng said that other companies submitted proposals to the community trust that controls the rights: \u201cThe Mphahlele Trust required a strategic, financial and operational partner to prospect and mine\u2026 Dithabeng was the only company that proposed a 51%- 49% partnership in favour of the community.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n A year ago, angry residents of Ga-Mphahlele spilt into its potholed roads, blocking access and closing down schools in protest against what they said was Dithabeng\u2019s \u201cillegal\u201d chrome mine.<\/p>\n\n\n\n They were furious, accusing Malekutu \u2014 whose proclivities for the high life and flashy motorbikes has not helped endear him to his impoverished community \u2014 and his mother of signing away communal land without properly consulting with the community.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The open-cast mine sits on the edge of a cluster of dust-blown villages that make up Ga-Mphahlele, part of what used to be the Lebowa Bantustan.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Malekutu Phatudi (Photo: Mphahlele View Facebook site)<\/p>\n\n\n\n Like many former Bantustan areas, Ga-Mphahlele has the feel of a place that rarely falls within the state\u2019s gaze \u2013 all along its threadbare roads are signs of neglect. But beneath its rust red soil are some of the richest mineral deposits in the world, that companies like Dithabeng are determined to tap into.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Dithabeng, which describes itself on its website as \u201cprogressive, trailblazing, socially conscious\u201d, maintains that it consulted widely, saying that in February 2017 it held a meeting attended by over 800 community members where \u201cconsensus was reached to sign an agreement in public as a sign of a broader buy in\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n But a faction of senior figures calling itself the Royal Council claims that they were presented with a fait accompli, and that there was no meaningful consultation with the community as a whole.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Interviews with a number of community members support this claim, and suggest that many of those affected believe they were not given a say at all.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cIt\u2019s like a circus,\u201d said one frustrated resident. \u201cThey take us from pillar to post \u2014 this one says one thing, that one says another.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Johan Lorenzen, a lawyer specialising in land tenure and mining, traditional institutions and chiefs have no statutory powers to sign away land rights without community consent. Nevertheless, this happens routinely.<\/p>\n\n\n\n A growing body of legal precedent has upheld the principle that communities that stand to be deprived of land use must first reach a consensus on giving up their land.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In 2018, the Constitutional Court handed down a landmark ruling<\/a> in favour of the Lesetlheng community in the North West in its battle against a mining company.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The judgement opened with a quote from Franz Fanon: \u201cFor a colonised people the most essential value, because the most concrete, is first and foremost the land: the land which will bring them bread and, above all, dignity.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Thus, the court ruled, \u201cstrip someone of the source of their livelihood, and you strip them of their dignity too\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Noting South Africa\u2019s long and bitter history of racialised dispossession, and the constitutional aim to remedy the wounds of the past, the court pointed to the importance of the Interim Protection of Informal Land Rights Act (IPILRA) in ensuring that communities have a right to determine what happens to the land they use.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Another victory against mining capital came the following month, when in November the North Gauteng High Court reaffirmed the importance of IPILRA in relation to mining laws. That case was brought by members of the Xolobeni community in the Eastern Cape who were challenging plans by Australian-linked Transworld Energy and Minerals to dig up land across a 22km stretch of coastline \u2014 see amaBhungane\u2019s recent report on Xolobeni here<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Critics of the mine at Ga-Mphahlele claim that Dithabeng could not have reached consensus with community members, because at best only a portion of those affected were given a single chance to air their views at a public meeting.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Lorenzen says it is the norm for communities to be presented with simple rubberstamping exercises \u2014 what passes for consultation is \u201cusually just a single mass meeting called by the traditional council\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Dithabeng denies that this was the case at Ga-Mphahlele. \u201cDithabeng Mining started discussions with the Mphahlele Community Development Trust in early 2016, followed by numerous meetings until the community consultation.\u201d An agreement was concluded followed by a \u201csigning ceremony\u201d at a local school \u201cattended by traditional council members and over 1200 community members\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Among those angered by the mine are a group of mashemo owners, or field occupiers, who say they have customary rights to the land and have used it for generations for grazing cattle and growing crops.<\/p>\n\n\n\n A letter signed by 83 mashemo owners organised under the Mashemo Owners Association, slams the mine and the Traditional Authority for striking the agreement in what they say was the absence of the owners, warning the chief that he may not \u201cdivest the occupiers of land of the use thereof without first consulting with them\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The letter also alleges that newly arrived residents have claimed ownership of land, and demands that \u201cthose who lay false claims upon the said piece of land must be called upon to identify theirs\u201d. <\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n AmaBhungane reached out to several signatories of the letter, who voiced their anger at the alleged failure to have been adequately consulted or compensated.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One, a man in his 60s, told amaBhungane that \u201cwe woke up to find this mine. We asked to see the chief, and he told us to make a meeting, but the chief is never available.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Dithabeng says that it negotiated with a different group of 79 owners \u2014 the Sefalaolo mashemo owners \u2014 and agreed to pay out R11 000 per hectare, some of which has already been paid.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The company says this deal was negotiated \u201cunder the Marula tree\u201d at the mine in August 2018, some months after the company began mining.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is unclear what proportion of those actually affected would receive compensation \u2014 a matter complicated by the messy and seemingly intractable divisions within the community, and the fact that those who use the land have informal customary rights to it, handed down over generations, but no title deeds.<\/p>\n\n\n Adriano Mazzotti<\/p>\n\n\n\n How does one even know who has a legitimate claim to the land where there are no title deeds?<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cPeople just know each other and who own what,\u201d says Hamilton Mphahlele, one of the Sefalaolo owners who negotiated with Dithabeng.<\/p>\n\n\n\n But there are \u201cchancers\u201d who will try to claim ownership.<\/p>\n\n\n\n He adds that the emergence of a \u201csplinter group\u201d of mashemo owners was enabled by the mine \u201cnot playing open cards with the mashemo owners\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Hamilton also accuses the mine of acting in bad faith: \u201cAt first they said they wanted to mine and then they\u2019ll pay, then they kept on shifting the goal posts. At some point when there was a bit of pressure, they paid a few people a portion of the money.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Neither the company nor the Traditional Authority were willing to give figures of how much had been paid out to date. \u201cDithabeng is not obliged to disclose this information which is of a confidential nature,\u201d the company said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n But it maintains that it has made all reasonable efforts: \u201cThe consultation process in this regard was extensive in that the identification of the field occupiers was a long and timeous process in itself. Dithabeng has spent countless hours attending to the due diligence on the ownership and making sure the that the field occupiers\u2019 families were involved so that all affected parties were consulted and aware of the progress.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n There have also been allegations that Mazzotti has leveraged his friendship with Malema \u2014 who has been living in Mazzotti\u2019s luxury complex in Hyde Park, Johannesburg \u2014 to defuse opposition to the mine.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In September 2017, community members sent a letter to EFF Limpopo leader Jossey Buthane, accusing the EFF of meddling in the community\u2019s affairs and siding with the mine.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The letter contained allegations that a controversial local EFF leader, Topa Mphahlele, led a group of supporters to the mine to \u201cbully\u201d protesting security workers, demanding they resume work because \u201cMalema will not like the delay in production\u201d. The incident was reported on at the time by African Times<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n When contacted by amaBhungane, Topa, who has since left the EFF for the newly formed African Transformation Movement, confirmed that he led a group to protect the mine. \u201cJossey Buthane [the Limpopo EFF leader] is the one who said we must go there and protect the mine. He said that this is our mine, and you must go there and protect our interests.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n He also told amaBhungane that, prior to that, the EFF were called in by community members opposed to the mine to support them at a mass meeting with Dithabeng\u2019s bosses. His account suggests this was probably the February 2017 \u201cconsultation\u201d meeting.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Topa claims that at the meeting Mazzotti called Malema and passed the phone to him, at which point Malema told Topa to leave the meeting and not do anything to frustrate Dithabeng.<\/p>\n\n\n\n AmaBhungane spoke to three other former EFF members, all of whom have joined the ATM. Claiming to have been present, they confirmed the story of the meeting and the phone call from Malema. One of them also claimed he was involved with the group subsequently sent to protect the mine.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Buthane denies the allegations, accusing the former EFF members of \u201cplaying dirty politics with the EFF\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cYou are dealing with disgruntled members who resigned from the EFF,\u201d he told amaBhungane.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Buthane says that although the party received a letter asking for assistance in opposing the mine, EFF members decided not to involve themselves in what they felt was a dispute over the chieftaincy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Asked if he himself had met Mazzotti, Buthane said, \u201cI don\u2019t remember.\u201d Pressed further, he said, \u201cLook, if I meet Mazzotti, there is nothing wrong with that.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n The EFF also denied meddling. Spokesperson Sixo Gcilishe said: \u201cMr Malema has never done any of these things. We really have no idea what amaBhungane is talking about.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n In response to questions about the alleged call, Dithabeng\u2019s attorneys told amaBhungane: \u201cMr Mazzotti nor any of the directors of Dithabeng did not contact Mr Malema nor would they have done so. Mr Mazzotti\u2019s friendship with Mr Malema is not abused for personal gain.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n A month after the agreement was signed in February 2017, Dithabeng began breaking ground. It was piggybacking on the prospecting right for chrome, iron and vanadium held by the community trust.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Satellite images from July that year show significant disturbance to the ground \u2013 the beginning of a large trench being dug by an excavator, as well as what appear to be a number of lorries.<\/p>\n\n\n Satellite image of Dithabeng mine (GoogleEarth).<\/p>\n\n\n\n Community members opposed to the mine claim that Dithabeng was not just prospecting, but secretively mining without a mining permit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The company\u2019s prospecting works programme \u2013 a legally prescribed document that sets out the prospector\u2019s activities \u2013 <\/span>does not provide for any form of bulk prospecting, nor does it allow for open-cast mining and the removal of large volumes of ore.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The only \u201cinvasive\u201d activity that the programme mentioned was borehole drilling. For Dithabeng to mine legally, it would require a mining permit, which it only received in November 2017. For several months before that time, Dithabeng appeared to be carting off truckloads of ore, prompting the allegations of illegal mining \u2013 a charge that Dithabeng denies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cDithabeng is prospecting and mining in accordance with a small-scale permit, which it is entitled to do\u201d, says the company. It <\/span>claims it is the victim of a smear campaign and has hit out at the Royal Council \u2013 the senior faction opposed to the mine \u2013 which it charges is \u201cdisseminating false allegations\u201d and \u201cattempting to extort money from Dithabeng which Dithabeng refuses to pay\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThe majority of the Mapahlele community supports Dithabeng however there are a few members who have hidden agendas and are spreading unfounded, untrue and baseless allegations.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n In October 2017, after Dithabeng opposed court proceedings brought by the Royal Council, the Polokwane High Court handed down an interim ruling reiterating that the company was bound by \u201cthe terms of its prospecting permit and work programme\u201d. The court ruled that the mining agreement would have to be renegotiated by the successful party in the leadership dispute, which was also before court.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Royal Council has been fighting a two-pronged battle in court. One part, which is still ongoing, aims to challenge the legitimacy of the chief.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The second part focused on the legality of the company\u2019s agreement with the community trust, but it floundered when the court struck the matter from the roll earlier this year on a technicality \u2013 lawyers for the Royal Council failed to file practice notes due to what they say was a \u201cmiscommunication\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Outside the courtrooms, the battle over the mine reached a peak in May last year, when violent protests erupted. Community members called for the mine to be shut down. Their opposition to the mine fused with animosity towards Ngwanamohube, then still the acting chieftainess, and her son Malekutu, who later in the year would succeed her.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The mine was seen as Malekutu\u2019s project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Traditional Authority, now under Malekutu\u2019s leadership, sees it differently: \u201cProtests [were] caused by members of the so called Royal Council with intention to unseat the acting chieftainess after unsuccessful attempt of [the high court] review process\u2026 the so called Royal Council staged constant threats to burn the machinery and threaten the workers on site.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n It accuses the Royal Council of pursuing its own mining interests.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Around this time, the 1 000 Madoda \u2014 the mine\u2019s security \u201cvolunteers\u201d \u2014 <\/span>developed a reputation as thugs for hire.<\/p>\n\n\n\n AmaBhungane spoke to two 1 000 Madoda members, who say the group is made up mostly of unemployed young men, including ex-convicts and gangsters.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The mine then began paying them around the time of the May protests \u2014 at first cash-in-hand under the mine\u2019s Marula tree, later into bank accounts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n They say that they were protecting the interests of both Dithabeng and the ruling family, who were accused of having sold out the community.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One member of the group told amaBhungane that it was a representative of Malekutu who first approached them, in early 2018, with the offer to act as security guards.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Both 1 000 Madoda sources say they broke up community meetings and assaulted protesters opposed to the mine.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Traditional Authority described the claims as \u201cmalicious and misleading\u201d and told amaBhungane it had never encouraged anyone to intimidate members of the community.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Although they were never formally employed, 1 000 Madoda members apparently received between R1 300 and R2 600 a month each. One of the sources produced a bank statement showing a payment from Dithabeng of R2 600.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The company claims that it hires the men as part of a \u201cvolunteer initiative program where Dithabeng gets volunteers from the community to do security work and compensates them\u201d. The company said it did so in order to assist with the dire unemployment situation in the area.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cApproximately 84 community volunteers are currently security guards.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Dismissing claims that it hired thugs as \u201cuntrue and malicious\u201d, the company said: \u201cAt the end of the year [2018] some volunteers became violent and threatened workers on the mine to pay them a bonus…<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cIn January 2019 these disgruntled \u2018volunteers\u2019 came to the mine and started to demand employment failing which they would burn all the equipment. This resulted in Dithabeng having to lay criminal charges…<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThese few members of the community that are making these unfounded claims are the instigators that are causing the disturbance in the community.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is clear from accounts by ordinary members of the community, and posts on community Facebook pages, that the 1 000 Madoda are widely feared.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cYou mention the 1 000 Madoda and I fear for my life,\u201d said one elderly resident amaBhungane spoke to. \u201cThe community is now divided, and some people are benefitting from all the shenanigans,\u201d he added.<\/p>\n\n\n\n At the heart of the matter is the community trust, which contracted with Dithabeng on the community\u2019s behalf.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The story of the trust goes back to its formation in late 2008. After successive boom years in the platinum industry, a sweeping arch of Limpopo province atop the world\u2019s largest reserves of the mineral was turned into a new mining frontier.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Chrome and platinum mines mushroomed, blighting the rural landscape with their dumps, conveyor-belts and industrial headgear, and leaving communities at war with themselves over the spoils.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Ga-Mphahlele community, eager to get in on the profits to be made, founded the Mphahlele Community Development Trust to administer funds from mining and other commercial activities taking place on the community\u2019s land. The then regent, Ngwanamohube, and four other community members were made trustees.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In the following years potential platinum investors began sniffing out the area, but nothing came of that. Platinum mining requires big capital outlays, while geological constraints make it hard to turn a profit in a market that is fickle and sensitive to international consumer trends. After the global recession of 2008, the market slumped.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In the meantime, the community approached government for the right to prospect for chrome \u2013 the barriers to entry for chrome mining in Limpopo being much lower than for platinum.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In June 2015, government signed off on a chrome prospecting right in the name of the community trust, but the community still needed an investor to partner with. In stepped Dithabeng in 2016, with a plan to mine chrome and lofty promises to uplift the community.<\/p>\n\n\n\n On 25 February 2017 the deal with Dithabeng was formally sealed. In a photo from that day, taken at the signing ceremony held on the grounds of a dilapidated local school, a grinning Mazzotti stands alongside his business partner and Dithabeng co-director Gladstone Reuben \u2014 both in black suits and sunglasses \u2014 with Ngwanamohube standing next to them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Malekutu inked the agreement on behalf of the trust.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Missing from the photo is Dithabeng\u2019s third director, Mohammadh Sayed, who is also a director alongside Mazzotti in tobacco company Carnilinx. That company has been in the media spotlight over allegations of tax dodging, while its directors have financially supported Malema and the EFF.<\/p>\n\n\n\nDivided community<\/h5>\n\n\n\n
![\"\"\/](\"http:\/\/amabhungane.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/07\/Malekutu-Phatudi-Photo_Mphahlele-View-Facebook-site.jpeg\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\nConsent<\/h5>\n\n\n\n
Compensation<\/h5>\n\n\n\n
![\"\"\/](\"http:\/\/amabhungane.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/07\/Adriano-Mazzotti.png\")
<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\nEFF leverage?<\/h5>\n\n\n\n
Breaking boundaries<\/h5>\n\n\n\n
![\"\"\/](\"http:\/\/amabhungane.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/07\/Satellite-image-of-Dithabeng-mine-GoogleEarth.png\")
<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\u201cThugs\u201d<\/h5>\n\n\n\n
Breakdown of trust<\/h5>\n\n\n\n
![\"\"\/](\"http:\/\/amabhungane.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/07\/Timeline_Dithabeng.jpg\")
<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n![\"\"\/](\"http:\/\/amabhungane.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/07\/Community-members-march-on-Dithabeng-Photo_Mphahlele-View-Facebook-site-1-e1563384833301.jpg\")
<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n