Makuta Analysis : Which goal for the mining fund for future generations?

Published on

Note

  • Congo
  • Mining
Note d'analyse: Pourquoi le fonds minier pour les générations futures (PDF)

Associated partners

  • Makuta ya maendeleo
  • Action pour la défense des droits humains (addh)
  • Observatoire d'etudes et d'appui à la responsabilité sociale et environnementale (oearse)
  • Cadre de concertation de la société civile de l’ituri sur les ressources naturelles (cdc/rn)
  • Justice pour tous (jpt)
  • Initiative pour la bonne gouvernance et les droits humains (ibgdh)
  • The carter center

In this note, the Makuta ya Maendeleo consortium examines the Mining Fund for Future Generations (FOMIN), created by the 2018 Mining Code to set aside a share of mining revenues for tomorrow’s Congolese. Funded by 10% of the mining royalty, the fund became operational when its leadership was appointed in December 2021 and had already accumulated some USD 208 million by the end of 2021. The consortium nonetheless concludes that, as currently designed, FOMIN will be unable to fulfil its mission.

The problem begins with poorly defined objectives. The 2019 decree assigns the fund development-financing tasks — infrastructure, agriculture, industry — closer to those of a development fund than of an intergenerational savings fund, which contradicts the legislator’s intent and leaves the door open to immediate spending. Compounding this are the absence of an explicit intergenerational-equity policy, the vagueness surrounding the savings horizon, and the framework’s silence on withdrawal conditions, gaps that expose the fund to short-term budgetary pressure. Governance raises similar concerns: the board is largely made up of government representatives, with no seat for civil society or independent experts, and nothing guarantees a separation between asset management and political power.

The note finally points to weaknesses in transparency and oversight. The framework provides for no systematic publication of financial statements, investments and performance, no independent external audit, and no clear rules limiting investment risk, while parliamentary scrutiny remains marginal. On the strength of these findings, the consortium recommends recasting FOMIN as a genuine savings fund, clarifying its objectives and withdrawal rules, opening its governance to independent members, and subjecting its management to strict publication and audit requirements, following the model of well-regarded sovereign wealth funds.

Related resources