top of page

Mining industry and understanding the Rule of law

Many societies, for many centuries have agreed in the importance of the Rule of Law (ROL) and the idea that a solid legal system is basic for the functioning of the society itself, for the economy to flourish and in general for the wellness of the people. However, when we try to analyze the concept of Rule of Law, we find it difficult to find a single definition, although most of the time we have an idea and we relate the concept with a legal order consisting with predictable, enforceable and efficient rules; truth to be told, ROL is a concept with multiple definitions and multiple conceptions, which has been debated along history by political theorists, philosophers, lawyers, scholars, from Aristotle, Montesquieu or Locke, and more recently by Weber, Hayek, Dicey and Sen.

In this article, I will analyze four different conceptions of the ROL and relate them to the mining industry, for a better understanding of how the key players and stakeholders of this important industry can perceive the ROL under these conceptions, which are going to be organized and divided according to two main criteria: 1) the level or degree of autonomy of the legal order from other aspects or orders such as morals or politics and 2) the degree of the relative value against other competing considerations analyzed. For you as reader, the interesting part comes here, where, even if you did not realize it before from a theoretical perspective, you will find that your mindset or your way of thinking or defining the ROL most likely will fit into one of the categories that are going to be analyzed below.

According to the first criteria of classification (the level or degree of autonomy of the legal order from other aspects or orders such as morals or politics), there is a distinction between an institutional and a substantive conception of the ROL.

If you support the institutional conception of ROL, then you would be concerned mostly about the efficacy of the system of rules, meaning, you would be a strong supporter that any government action should be authorized by law (such as granting a mining concession according to the dispositions of the mining law and its regulations, and also respecting the mining concessions already granted according to the law) and also, you would be a strong believer that the law should be capable of guiding the conduct of the people, and you would demand your congressman and congresswoman to enact laws and regulations related to the mining industry that are general, public, prospective, clear, non-contradictory, conformable, stable and congruent.

Dear reader, if you consider that your conception of the ROL is institutional you still have another decision to make, since the interesting part comes when I describe to you that those who support the institutional conception of the ROL, are also divided into two further categories, which are the Intrumental and the Instrinsic categories, depending on the degree of relative value against other competing considerations.

The Institutional-instrumental conception of the ROL, supported by the German sociologist and economist Max Weber, considers a relationship between “rational law” and economic development; and the most important element of the legal system in this conception is the high degree of stability and calculability of the law and of the institutions that apply the law, therefore, it is most likely that any investor in the Mining Industry would agree with Weber, and with the fact that the legal system has to be so clear and transparent to enable to predict the actions of other individuals and the state, and thus to allow individuals to engage securely in economic transactions.

The Institutional-intrinsic conception of the ROL, supported by the British jurist and constitutional theorist A. V. Dicey, considers three elements for the existence of rule of law: a) absence of arbitrary power on the part of the government; b) legal equality of individuals and c) the need that under the rule of law constitutional, norms are the result of ordinary law as established by ordinary courts. Meaning, that if you have ever thought that the Mining authorities are forced to follow and obey the due process during the administrative procedures that they execute, and that they should be submitted to their own laws, and, that the holders of mining concessions should have declared rights that should have enforceable remedies against the actions of the authorities, or if you have ever though or said quotes such as “nobody is above the law” or “there should be no impunity”, then surely this is your conception of the ROL.

The second main classification of the conceptions of the ROL, as I had anticipated is the substantive conception, which takes the formal characteristics of the institutional conception analyzed before, but in addition, requires the existence of specific rights that are inherent in the legal system, in other words, it does not only require the existence of law, but it does make a distinction between good law and bad law. Dear reader, if you agree with this conception and with the fact that there could be bad and good laws, I still can make your decision a little more interesting by explaining that the substantive conception also has two versions, as follows:

The Substantive-instrumental conception of the ROL, supported by the Austrian economist, jurist, and philosopher Friedrich Hayek, who believes that the Rule of Law is “the legal embodiment of freedom.” Therefore, it will be based in the daily choices and decisions taken by the citizens and the companies, and those decisions guiding their activities, opposed to the government choices and decisions that should be limited and should not be completely free or arbitrary, respecting at the same time basic human rights of the governed (such as property or freedom) and contractual rules. Hayek defines as “arbitrary” a government that tries to direct or control the economy. For example, under Hayek’s perspective, the last reform of the Mining Law in Mexico in which the government reserved the exploration and exploitation of the Lithium for the Mexican State would have been considered as arbitrary, since this conception of the ROL is not necessarily concerned with whether government actions are legal or not in a juridical sense, the actions of the State might be legal and supported by law, but if the law gives the government power to act arbitrarily, then the ROL does not really exist. Does the reader identify him or herself with this way of thinking?

Finally, the Substantive-intrinsic conception of the ROL, supported by the Indian economist Amartya Kumar Sen, who believes that any legal system ought to be judged according to whether it enables peoples’ capability to exercise their rights and reach its own fulfillment. The rule of law enshrines the greatest values that societies can aspire to, such as justice, equality, democracy, economic development, legal development, or freedom and it cannot be compromised without foregoing these values. For the reader, it is important to mention that according to this conception of the ROL, development is an amalgam and an integration of developments in the distinct economic, legal, political, and social domains and is not only focused on the economy. Therefore, if you were to support this perspective of the ROL, you would believe that the legal system should allow the Mining Industry to freely operate under the existing rules exercising its own rights, being fully compliant with the law, but also, that the mining industry should be an ally to its own stakeholders to reach their own interests and values, such as justice, equality, human rights, economic development and to be a promotor of the capabilities of the communities and individuals around it to help them achieve their own goals and personal fulfillment, as well as to protect the environment and sustainability.

Since the 1990s and until today, the World Bank and other important international institutions have broadened their rhetoric about the ROL to include the four conceptions previously discussed. We cannot defend or protect what we do not know, therefore, by having a better understanding of the rule of law, we shall be able as a society to have more powerful tools not only to defend it, but to promote it and to implement it, and by logic, to demand from our authorities, substantive legal reforms that have important political, social, and economic implications in our countries, including, of course, those legal reforms related to the mining industry.


Featured Posts
Recent Posts
Search By Tags
No tags yet.
bottom of page