Scenario 1, alternative 2


Because the situation was not aggravated, you chose to continue with just observing for now.

You decide to continue with the observations of the stakeholder process without interfering at this time.

The stakeholder process is completed according to schedule and the company starts to initiate the resettlement and compensation process in one of the outer communities. There are a few negative-angled articles in the national newspapers about the company’s lack of transparency in the stakeholder process.

One article also describe how Angela, mother of four, was left by her husband as soon as he had received the family’s compensation package. As head of the household, he had (on behalf of his family) been made the official owner of the compensation package, which he had immediately sold. As the new owners of the property had come to move in, Angela and the children had been left no choice but to move out, but with no funds to start a life elsewhere. “I am not the only one affected like this” said Angela. The article conclude by connecting existing gender inequalities to what they call a “genderly ignorant resettlement process”.

As the company start hire local men for upcoming contracts in the mine, the already existing influx of people to Area West increase dramatically as people hope to benefit from the mine. The surrounding villages grow rapidly, and the majority of immigrated people are men. There is a spike of alcohol consumption due to increased cashflow. From the local police post in the area, you start receiving reports on high levels of gender-based violence, harassments and sexual assaults. Several of the convicted men are hired workers in the mine. Local women are saying that they do not feel safe anymore.

During an inspection in the new settlements, you also receive complaints from the resettled that their access to natural resources has been degraded in many ways, and many women now struggle to grow food for the family due to unfertile soil in their new lands. ”They did not consider the burden they put on us women when they designed the resettlement like this” said one woman. Now I have to walk so far to fetch water because of the mine, and I cannot go to the forest anymore for mushrooms and firewood.”

Both local and international NGO’s and medias start reporting from the site of Magda Mining and the associated human rights issues. Some start accusing the company of enabling discrimination of women and contributing to gender-based violence through their practices. There is restlessness and discontent in the communities. ESCA as a public authority is also being criticized for not protecting human rights, especially for women.