EU Commission Under Fire for Secret Mining Tactics Amid Raw Material Rush
EU Lawmakers Demand Transparent Access to Mining Impact Assessments
Members of the Green/EFA caucus have raised a flag concerning the newly approved “strategic” mining projects under the Critical Raw Materials Act. Researchers in the European Parliament cannot retrieve the environmental and social impact studies required for these projects, prompting scrutiny over the European Commission’s accountability.
Key Points Raised
- Access Denial: Lawmakers report that the impact assessments, which are vital for evaluating project sustainability, are not openly available.
- Transparency Concerns: The lack of visible data hampers the committee’s ability to monitor potential risks.
- Accountability Deficit: The European Commission is accused of not providing sufficient scrutiny mechanisms.
Implications for Environmental Oversight
Without visible assessments, stakeholders face challenges in ensuring that mining operations comply with safety, environmental, and social standards. The claim underscores the necessity for clearer communication channels between the Commission and parliamentary delegations.
European Commission Faces Pushback Over Critical Raw Material Projects
Updated: Commission Responds to Concerns
The European Commission has been criticized for skipping thorough public consultation in its rush to approve projects that will extract critical raw materials. Four Green/EFA Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) argue that the Commission has refused to provide requested information and is considering legal action.
Background: The Critical Raw Materials Act
The EU introduced the Critical Raw Materials Act (CRMA) in May, pinpointing minerals essential for electric vehicles, clean‑energy technologies, digital infrastructure and defence systems. The Act seeks to lessen reliance on single suppliers—chiefly China and the United States—by launching 60 new extraction initiatives: 47 located within EU territory and 13 positioned outside the Union.
Why the Issue Matters
- Strategic Independence – EU ambitions for electric vehicles and advanced tech hinge on a reliable supply of lithium, cobalt, and other key minerals.
- Competitive Landscape – China’s dominance in raw‑material extraction and manufacturing poses a direct challenge to EU goals.
- Environmental & Social Concerns – Proposed projects raise questions about ecological impact and community involvement.
MEPs Call for Transparency
Maria Ohisalo, Sara Matthieu, Majdouline Sbaï and Ana Miranda requested detailed assessments of several mining projects they deemed problematic. They reported:
“Despite multiple inquiries by MEPs and environmental NGOs, we haven’t received access or information regarding selected or upcoming projects. Transparency is not only a legal requirement but a cornerstone of institutional accountability.”
Next Steps
- MEPs are monitoring the Commission’s response closely.
- Potential legal action is being contemplated if the Commission does not provide the necessary data.
- The EU Commission has recently unveiled 13 targets for overseas raw‑material projects to address global supply chain challenges.
Looking Ahead
The European Parliament’s scrutiny underscores the need for rigorous consultation processes as the EU embarks on a roadmap to secure critical raw‑material supplies. Clear, transparent communication will be essential to maintaining trust among stakeholders and ensuring sustainable development.
Monitoring group has become an ’empty shell’, claims MEP
European Parliament MEPs Question CRM Board Transparency
Observer Status, Limited Access
Major examiner of trade rules, the French Member of the European Parliament (MEP) Majdouline Sbaï from Les Ecologistes, told Euronews that despite holding observer status on the Critical Raw Material (CRM) board, crucial project‑selection information remains unavailable to members. The CRM board, a monitoring group (MG) established within the European Parliament’s international‑trade committee, is intended to grant MEPs privileged access to confidential Commission data on trade matters.
Perceived Redundancy of Monitoring Groups
“From the onset of the mandate, at least in the CRM MG—and, by extension, in all similar monitoring groups—the Commission has consistently relayed data that has already been published,” explained Sbaï. “These working groups, therefore, have become essentially empty shells.”
Letter to the Commission and Specific Demands
- Request for access to impact assessments of mining projects that are under consideration.
- Information on the independent experts conducting the assessments to confirm impartiality.
- Exact geographical locations of the projects.
- Details about the Commission’s monitoring methodology for these initiatives.
During the first week of May, the four MEPs formally addressed these concerns to the Commission. A later response from Kerstin Jorna, Director‑General of the European Commission’s Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs division, was described as vague and evasive.
Commission’s Public Response
The Commission released a statement confirming that the decision is posted on its website, complemented by an interactive map of selected projects. A spokesperson added: “In accordance with Article 46 of the Critical Raw Material Act, trade and business secrets contained in submitted applications must remain confidential.”
Discretion Regarding Independent Experts
Further statements from the Commission clarified that the names of the experts remain undisclosed to protect the integrity of the assessment process and the privacy of those individuals.
The projects
The European Commission’s Watchlist: Six Controversial Mining Projects
They represent a mix of domestic and cross‑border ventures, many of which raise environmental and social concerns.
Projects Under Scrutiny
| Country | Project | Current Status |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | Mina Doade | Approved by the EU Commission after a 2018 rejection |
| Portugal | Barroso Mining Project | Under review |
| Finland | Sakatti Project | Approved; located in Natura 2000 wetlands |
| France | Allier Lithium Project | Proposed; facing local opposition |
| Serbia | Jadar Lithium Project | Legislative breakthrough; protests continue |
| New Caledonia | – | Project outside EU jurisdiction |
Example Projects in Detail
1. Mina Doade – Spain
2. Sakatti – Finland
3. Allier Lithium – France
4. Jadar – Serbia
Takeaway
The European Commission’s monitoring reflects a broader debate: balancing industrial growth with environmental stewardship and community engagement. Each of the six projects underscores the tension between pursuing raw‑material gains and safeguarding natural ecosystems and local livelihoods.
