Home Complaints database Jubilee Australia et al. on behalf of affected Morobe Province communities vs. Newcrest Mining Ltd and Harmony Gold (Australia) Pty Ltd
Complaint

Jubilee Australia et al. on behalf of affected Morobe Province communities vs. Newcrest Mining Ltd and Harmony Gold (Australia) Pty Ltd

Newcrest Mining and Harmony Gold’s proposed dumping of toxic mining waste in PNG

Date filed
9 November 2022
Keywords
Countries of harm
Current status
No resolution
Sector
NCP

Allegations

On 9 November 2022, Jubilee Australia, the Centre for Environmental Law and Community Rights, and the Evangelical Lutheran Church of PNG filed a complaint against Newcrest Mining and Harmony Gold (Australia) – both Australian mining companies – in relation to their proposal to dump toxic mining waste into the Huon Gulf in PNG’s Morobe Province. The complaint was lodged on behalf of 2,596 community members in Morobe Province.

The companies are joint partners in the Wafi-Golpu Joint Venture in PNG, which is proposing to construct and operate an underground copper-gold mine and associated ore processing. The complainants are opposed to the companies’ plan for the dumping of toxic mining waste into the ocean of the Huon Gulf.

The complaint makes several allegations against the companies, including:

  • Failure to obtain community consent for the proposal
  • Failure to provide an adequate environmental assessment of the proposal
  • Failure to respect human rights
  • Lack of due process in relation to Free Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) from the impacted communities

The complainants seek several remedies, including for the companies to publicly commit to abandon their proposal and to develop a new tailings management plan.

Relevant OECD Guidelines

Outcome

On 1 August 2023, the Australian NCP published its initial assessment, deciding that the complaint merited further consideration and would be appropriate for ‘good offices’ within the OECD Guidelines. The NCP will proceed to offer its good offices to both parties. The NCP noted the complainant’s interest in engaging with the respondent companies on discussions around their concerns regarding the disposal of mining waste into the ocean via the two sites as currently proposed by the companies.

On 29 August 2025, the Australian NCP published its final statement. As the parties were unable to come to an agreement on the issues raised, the NCP undertook its own examination. Its its statement, the NCP made 28 recommendations to the companies for consistency with the Guidelines, as well as determinations that their activities do not comply with the standards in the (2011 version of the) OECD Guidelines, namely:

  • Failure to disclose key information regarding foreseeable risks
  • Inadequate human rights due diligence
  • Failure to address environmental impacts over the full lifecycle
  • Regarding critically endangered species, failure to operate ‘within the framework of laws, regulations and administrative practices in the countries in which they operate, and in consideration of relevant international agreements, principles, objectives, and standards, take due account of the need to protect the environment’ to ‘assess, and address…the foreseeable environmental…impacts…with a view to avoiding or, when unavoidable, mitigating them’
  • Failure to establish an appropriate system of environmental management
  • Failure to adopt a precautionary approach related explicitly to the due diligence associated with critically endangered species, and appropriate baseline development commensurate with the level of risk

The NCP was unable to make determinations as to the companies respecting international human rights law, specifically the right to FPIC, and their protection of the environment for the entirety of  the project.

Given the large number of recommendations by the NCP, the NCP recommended for the companies to develop an open and transparent plan, including timeframes and responsibilities for implementation, for all of the recommended actions into a coherent framework. The NCP said: “Noting that most of these activities relate to FPIC and due diligence, it is envisaged that all activities would be undertaken before the project receives its final approvals, and formally commences its operations. The initial plan should be developed within three months of the final report being released and should be disclosed publicly. An update should be provided at six months and twelve months.” The NCP’s recommendations related to the companies strengthening their human rights and environmental due diligence and FPIC processes, ensuring all baseline data used by the companies use recent data and apply best practice standards, further development of internal (disclosure) policies, addressing technical and scientific contentions, and reviewing relevant project documentation.

More details

Defendant
Company in violation
Other companies involved
Complainants
Affected people
Date rejected / concluded
29 August 2025

Related complaints

Documents