Serbia is developing a new Mineral and Geological Resources Management Strategy for 2025–2040, and the process has drawn criticism from opponents of the plan. The Ministry of Mining consulted major foreign companies, including NIS, majority Russian-owned, and Chinese firm Zijin. Critics say local expertise was not included, citing the absence of engagement with the Faculty of Mining and Geology.
Consultations with companies and limited involvement of local experts
As the strategy was prepared, the Ministry of Mining held consultations that included major foreign companies. Local experts such as the Faculty of Mining and Geology were not consulted, according to critics. The concerns raised focus on whether the process was transparent and whether corporate priorities outweighed public interests.
Access restrictions during public presentations
Public consultations were described as tightly controlled during presentations related to the strategy. Some invited environmental academics and opposition figures were denied entry, while private security and police were used to limit access. The Ministry said the process was open, but records indicate that 19 comments submitted by the Academic Board for Environmental Protection did not appear in official reports.
Permitting changes and land expropriation provisions
The strategy includes measures intended to ease operations for companies. It promises simplified procedures and faster permit issuance. It also allows for expropriation of land for commercial interests, according to critics who argue this could weaken state control over mineral resources.
Critics also contend that the approach does not address options such as increasing extraction fees or restricting automatic granting of mining rights to companies conducting exploration. The dispute centers on how rights would be allocated and what safeguards would apply during exploration activities.
Mining rules in high natural value areas
Environmental safeguards under the strategy have been questioned because it would allow mining without restrictions in areas described as high natural value. The areas cited include national parks and regional water sources. Critics say this framework prioritizes accelerated exploitation rather than long-term sustainable resource management.
Use of corporate data linked to Rio Tinto project
The Ministry maintains that the strategy serves state interests. However, skepticism has been fueled by reliance on corporate-provided data connected to the Rio Tinto project. Critics argue this raises questions about whose priorities are reflected in planning for Serbia’s mineral resources.