Zimbabwe has extended its emergency river rehabilitation programme by two months, giving authorities additional time to restore waterways damaged by mining. But environmental advocates say a longer deadline must be accompanied by stronger oversight to ensure restoration does not become another route to mineral extraction.
President Emmerson Mnangagwa extended the State of Disaster covering 17 designated river areas across six provinces through Statutory Instrument 146 of 2026.
According to the regulations, rehabilitation has not been completed to the satisfaction of the Inter-Ministerial Committee on Riverine Ecosystems Rehabilitation. The committee considered the initial three-month period insufficient to finish the work.
The extension keeps the programme’s existing powers, duties and arrangements in place, while contracts entered into under the original declaration remain in force.
Recognition of a crisis — and questions about its causes
In a statement supplied by Farai Maguwu, executive director of the Centre for Natural Resource Governance (CNRG), the organisation welcomed the Government’s recognition of the environmental crisis but argued that the disaster declaration also exposed longstanding weaknesses in mining regulation.
The statement addresses the rehabilitation framework and the original declaration, rather than specifically responding to the latest extension.
CNRG said both legal and illegal mining had contributed to the deterioration of Zimbabwe’s rivers, citing siltation, pollution, altered water flows and biodiversity loss.
“It is a clear admission at the highest level that unchecked and poorly regulated mining has inflicted severe damage on river ecosystems, biodiversity, water resources, and the communities that depend on them,” the organisation said.
For CNRG, the emergency intervention should therefore do more than repair damaged waterways. It should also address the failures in oversight and enforcement that allowed the damage to accumulate.
Restoration or further extraction?
A central concern raised by CNRG is that contractors could use access granted for rehabilitation to conduct further mining.
The organisation warned that, without transparent contracts, independent monitoring and clear limits on permitted activities, the programme could benefit private mineral interests while leaving rivers exposed to additional disturbance.
“There is a real risk that mining activities could be conducted under the guise of river rehabilitation, further worsening environmental destruction while benefiting private interests,” CNRG said.
That warning is a call for preventive safeguards; it does not, by itself, establish wrongdoing by contractors working under the current programme.
The regulations provide for minerals recovered during rehabilitation. Approved contractors must report such recoveries to the Ministry of Mines within seven days, and the ministry may inspect them to verify their quantity and value for royalty purposes.
This creates a reporting mechanism for recovered minerals. CNRG’s concerns go further, focusing on how authorities will distinguish legitimate restoration work from mineral extraction and assess the environmental consequences of contractors’ activities.
River repair requires specialist expertise
CNRG argued that rehabilitation should be guided by environmental science, with input from specialists in hydrology, geology and ecology.
“River restoration is not simply an extension of mining operations,” the organisation said.
It called for scientific assessments, detailed rehabilitation plans, environmental monitoring and community participation to ensure interventions restore damaged ecosystems.
The organisation also urged rigorous environmental due diligence and public scrutiny of companies it identified in connection with rehabilitation initiatives, including Primascopic, Better Brands in the Mutare River and Prevail Group International in the Mazowe.
The supplied material contains no responses from those companies and does not independently establish their activities or compliance records.
Who oversees the programme?
An inter-ministerial committee jointly chaired by the ministers responsible for Environment and Water Resources oversees the rehabilitation programme.
Its duties include inviting bids, approving contracts, supervising implementation and handling written grievances. The ministers responsible for Mines, Home Affairs and Local Government also participate, alongside other representatives considered necessary by the joint chairpersons.
The programme spans Mashonaland Central, Mashonaland East, Mashonaland West, Matabeleland South, Midlands and Manicaland.
The listed waterways include the Mazowe, Murowodzi, Save, Angwa, Sanyati, Munyati, Mupfure, Umzingwane, Insiza, Manzimudaka, Mutebekwi, Mtshingwe, Mutare, Haroni and Nyamukwarara. Some rivers appear under more than one province in the supplied list.
What would accountability look like?
CNRG wants the Government to publish clear criteria governing rehabilitation, require independent environmental impact assessments and provide regular public reports on activities, budgets and outcomes.
It also called for affected communities, local authorities and civil society organisations to participate meaningfully, with independent monitoring by environmental experts and academic institutions.
Those proposals would give the public a clearer basis for judging progress beyond whether contracts remain active or deadlines are extended.
The Government’s stated reason for the additional two months is that rehabilitation remains unfinished. The supplied information, however, does not provide river-by-river progress figures, expenditure details or measurable completion targets.
The extension gives the programme more time. Whether it delivers lasting recovery will depend on the quality of the work, the strength of oversight and whether the activities responsible for the damage are brought under effective control.
