emphasized the importance of independent information particularly regarding
environmental matters. The Panel’s observations suggest that information and engagement
systems need to be strengthened.
Most Pamaka with whom the Panel engaged during its short visit indicated that they
accepted the Cooperation Agreement as the outcome of negotiations by the designated
representatives of the Pamaka traditional authority. However, there was limited awareness
of what the agreement included, and what it offered in terms of safeguards and
opportunities for development. Some people indicated that the intensity and style of
company-community engagement changed after the Mineral Agreement had been signed.
Once the project entered the construction phase, people indicated that the company’s
engagement shifted to the Negotiating Committee and the Captains, rather than general
members of the community. Some people indicated that prior to this, community
engagement extended to the household level, and was more inclusive of women and
youth.47
Surgold managers highlighted challenges associated with ensuring access to information,
and with realizing community engagement more generally. Aside from the challenges
presented by logistics and the transient nature of the Pamaka community, a number of
internal, organizational issues were raised with the Panel. These issues were associated with
the transitions through project approval, construction and operations, and the different
priorities of these respective teams. The on-site community relations team reported that
there were limited resources available to them to span their work across routine
engagement, issues management, analytical work and studies, and longer-term strategic
planning.
Summary points
• Members of the Pamaka Negotiating Committee described an open exchange of
information between parties during engagement and agreement negotiations.
• Issues associated with accessing information about issues of concern and from
independent sources were raised with the Panel.
• There were reports that Merian’s village-level community engagement effort
diminished during the construction period.
• Merian’s community relations team does not appear to have the necessary
resources to meet Surgold’s stated objective of engaging and negotiating with the
Pamaka based on the principles of FPIC.
47
According to company sources, this would have been the period of engagement for the ESIA and
when Surgold had a more active program of engagement, before the project entered the
construction period.
23