These sad but true words were uttered by the Congolese administration manager for a copper mining company, Charles Kyona, when the Democratic Republic of Congo’s government was reviewing the validity of 61 foreign mining contracts in 2007 and 2008.

Kyona, a highly respected man who had once been a DRC government adviser, was speaking to African Angle during the global financial crisis, one of the most difficult periods in the DRC’s modern history.

Apart from the GFC gripping the world, at that time the copper price had melted away and access to debt funding for mining projects – particularly in challenging jurisdictions like the DRC – was nigh impossible.

And not a country to learn from errors past, the Congo is about to once again shoot itself in the foot with a review of its 2002/3 Mining Code – the fourth such review of the country’s mining laws or mining contracts since Laurent Kabila overthrew long-time dictator Mobutu Sese Seko in May 1997.

Here’s how it has played out over the years:

• The first review of mining contracts began in October 1997, just five months after Kabila marched into DRC capital city Kinshasa with his rag-tag army in the wake of the fleeing Mobutu. Most companies had minor adjustments made to taxation liabilities, but were largely unscathed. However, Canadian miner Banro had its mining rights rescinded in 1998, despite the fact that Banro had a presidential decree signed by then Prime Minister Kengo Wa Dondo giving it those rights.
• The second review of mining contracts took place following the installation of the transitional government in 2003, comprising a bipartisan parliamentary commission headed by Congolese lawmaker Christophe Lutundula. This became known as the Lutundula Commission and it was not really clear what the outcomes of this exercise were. Congolese officials visited companies which were asked about tenements, operations and social development initiatives. Companies were subsequently simply offered minor suggestions on the localisation of jobs and social development.
• The third and most seriously damaging review for the mining industry came between 2007 and 2009. It was called the Interministerial Commission for the Revisitation of Mining Contracts. This commission had the task of reviewing 61 contracts negotiated between 1998 and 2003 (before the Mining Code of 2002/3 was introduced). There were three simple outcomes envisioned by the commission, spelt out by then Deputy Mines Minister Victor Kasongo at Cape Town’s Mining Indaba in February 2008: contracts remain as they were; or be renegotiated; or cancelled. It was not as much the review of the contracts which troubled the miners, but the length of time it took to complete. The Katanga Province, where nearly all DRC’s copper and cobalt mining takes place, was devastated as mining companies scaled back or placed production on care and maintenance. The more unscrupulous foreign miners or minerals processors simply locked the gates, left workers unpaid and flew out of the Katanganese capital, Lubumbashi, overnight. Apart from shaking investor confidence to its core, the review caused untold misery and hardship for citizens who lost the income and self-respect that permanent, meaningful employment gave them. One of the biggest corporate casualties was that of respected Canadian miner, First Quantum Minerals, which had its Frontier mine and other assets illegally seized.
• So now in 2015, the current review of the Mining Code of 2003 is not so much an examination of individual mining contracts, but rather an overhaul on the taxation regime to ensure a bigger stake for the Congolese government. Exactly what form or shape the amended code will take is anybody’s guess. Until early this year, the government had consulted the mining industry on the new code, with the DRC Chamber of Mines stating that good progress had been made in regard to royalty and stability issues.

These talks have now apparently broken down and the Chamber of Mines is deeply concerned. After its annual general meeting in March, vice-chairman Simon Tuma-Waku warned that changes to the code would put the industry at grave risk.

Copper production from the DRC is now more than 1 million tonnes per annum, dramatically up from the 20,000tpa in the early 1990s and 500,000tpa during the 1970s.

In urging the country to retain the Mining Code of 2002/3, Tuma-Waku said it was this code that had supported investment and development to the point where the DRC had overtaken Zambia as Africa’s largest copper producer, and where exploration spend, project pipeline and production growth were superior to those in surrounding mining countries.

“The 2002 code attracts investment but not at the expense of taxes. It is, in fact, a model of its kind, which has exceeded expectations in all the dimensions in which success can be measured,” Tuma-Waku said.

“The DRC is a major beneficiary of this success, with some of the first big mining projects developed under the 2002 code now moving into full tax-paying positions, mining companies contributed more than $1 billion to the DRC treasury last year, despite lower commodity prices.”

The bold-hearted foreign direct investors which have gone to DRC are unlikely to be there because it is a fun place to be – they go there for the mesmerisingly rich orebodies, arguing that reward outweighs the risk of being in that troubled land.

However, whether the reward to be found in those 7%-plus copper orebodies still outweighs the risk of what the Congolese lawmakers are currently conjuring up in the new mining code remains to be seen.