Mrima Hill, a 157-hectare (390-acre) forest in Kenya's Kwale County, is estimated to contain mineral deposits, including rare earth elements and niobium, worth more than $62.4 billion. These critical minerals are vital for high-tech industries, electric vehicles, renewable energy systems, and advanced electronics, prompting significant interest from global powers like the US and China. The US, with interim ambassador Marc Dillard visiting Mrima Hill in June, views securing these critical minerals as a key part of its Africa policy, while Chinese nationals have also attempted to visit the site.
The renewed global attention, however, has created unease among the local Digo community, who consider Mrima Hill a sacred site with ancestral graves and medicinal plants. Residents fear potential displacement, environmental degradation, and the loss of their cultural heritage, echoing past negative experiences with resource extraction in Kenya. Juma Koja, a local forest guard, expressed concerns about exploitation, stating, "I do not want my people to be exploited again."
Kenya's mining sector has a history of disputes and corruption, with authorities revoking Cortec Mining Kenya's license in 2013 due to environmental concerns and alleged irregularities, an event the company attributed to refusing to pay a bribe to the then Mining Minister. After a 2019 moratorium on new licenses, Kenya's Ministry of Mining announced reforms this year, including tax incentives and improved licensing transparency, aiming to increase mining's contribution to GDP from 0.8% to 10% by 2030. While some, like farmer Domitilla Mueni, see economic opportunity, others, including Professor Daniel Weru Ichang’i, warn about the risks of corruption and weak governance. An Australian consortium, including RareX and Iluka Resources, has announced plans for exploration, and land speculators are reportedly active in nearby coastal villages.
The Centre for Litigation Trust, a legal advocacy organization, has challenged a potential deal between Kenya and the US to mine the area in court, citing a lack of transparency and public consultation. They argue that any such agreement requires parliamentary approval and that the specific contract details remain opaque to the public. The High Court has ordered respondents to file their responses within 14 days, with parties due back in court on July 21.
