Bridging the Gulf: How the HakiRasilimali report misrepresents Barrick Bulyanhulu

TUESDAY March 31, 2026

By The Tranquility News Correspondent, Tanzania

In the complex arena of natural resource governance, narratives frequently collide.

On one side stand civil society organisations, armed with data and critical analysis aimed at corporate accountability.

On the other are the communities living in the shadow of industrial giants—people whose daily realities are often far more nuanced than policy papers suggest.

A recent report by HakiRasilimali, titled Towards Sustainable Mining in Tanzania, has ignited a fierce debate regarding the Barrick Bulyanhulu Mine.

While the report ostensibly seeks to highlight gaps in sustainability and community relations in the rural areas of Lwabakanga and Kakola No. 9, a closer examination of ground-level reality reveals a stark contradiction.

According to village leaders and residents, the report’s narrative of exploitation does not align with the tangible transformation the mine has catalysed in their lives.

The Face of Transformation: Mary David’s story

To understand the depth of this disconnect, one must look beyond aggregated data and listen to individual voices.

Mary David, 61-year-old entrepreneur, offers a powerful counter-narrative to the report’s gloomy conclusions.

For Mary, Barrick Bulyanhulu Mine is not a source of grievance, but a foundation of prosperity.

Since 2021, Mary has supplied horticultural crops to the mine.

There is scarcely a family in the villages surrounding Bulyanhulu that hasn’t been touched by these opportunities,” Mary David, 61-year-old entrepreneur.

What began as a modest venture flourished through the mine’s direct intervention, which provided modern agricultural training for her and her 15-member group.

More importantly, the mine provided a guaranteed market, eliminating the volatility that often cripples small-scale farmers.

The ripple effects are profound. The income from this partnership allowed Mary to diversify into the clean cooking energy business.

Most significantly, it funded the higher education of her two daughters and two grandchildren, resulting in a family of professionals: Two pharmacists, a lab technician, and a specialised secretary.

“There is scarcely a family in the villages surrounding Barrick Bulyanhulu Mine that hasn’t been touched by these opportunities,” Mary insists.

To suggest otherwise, she argues, is to ignore the visible economic evolution unfolding in the community.

Methodological flaws and local critique

The dissonance between the HakiRasilimali report and local reality is most pronounced in the critique of its research methodology.

James Kayunga, Chairman of Lwabakanga Village, provided a scathing review, alleging that the research process was manipulated to yield a predetermined outcome.

According to Kayunga, researchers requested to speak with a select group of only three to five individuals.

However, the testimony he observed during that interaction bore no resemblance to the conclusions later published.

Specifically, the chairman disputes the report’s portrayal of the Grievance Mechanism.

He claims participants told researchers the system functions effectively, yet the report suggests a broken or dysfunctional framework.

Similarly, regarding employment, community members explained that while the mine reserves unskilled labour positions for locals, the real challenge lies in local administrative integrity.

Outsiders often infiltrate these roles by obtaining fraudulent residency documents from local officials—a nuance the chairman says was either lost or deliberately omitted from the report.

From marginathsation to ‘liberation’

This sentiment is echoed by the Chairman of Kakola No. 9, who frames the mine’s presence as “comprehensive liberation” rather than exploitation.

He points to permanent markers of progress: Renovated schools, health centres providing essential services, and roads that have ended decades of rural isolation.

By providing specialised employment schemes and fostering a robust business ecosystem, the mine has acted as a catalyst for a local economic boom.

The chairman’s use of the term “liberation” suggests that for his constituents, the mine has successfully broken a decades-long cycle of poverty and marginalisation.

The high stakes of misrepresentation

The contradiction raises critical questions about advocacy in Tanzania’s extractive sector.

While HakiRasilimali’s mandate to hold corporations accountable is necessary, the testimonies from Lwabakanga and Kakola No. 9 suggest a failure to capture the authentic community voice.

For residents, the stakes of this misrepresentation are high.

A report that falsely claims a dysfunctional relationship can strain the mine’s “social license to operate,” potentially leading to disruptions that cost jobs and deter future investment.

While the Towards Sustainable Mining in Tanzania report may serve as a tool for vigilance, it appears to fail the test of factual accuracy when weighed against the lived experiences of the people of Lwabakanga and Kakola No. 9.

The case of Barrick Bulyanhulu serves as a reminder that sustainable development is best measured not by ideological frameworks, but by the tangible improvement in the lives of ordinary people.

When the narrative on the ground speaks of opportunity and progress, any report claiming the contrary must be examined with the utmost scepticism, lest it harms the very communities it purports to defendΩ