Sasol confirms that on Thursday, 5 March 2026, members of the Kinross Business Forum conducted a march to the Bokamoso Shaft, a new extension of the Syferfontein colliery under construction.

The group handed over a memorandum to Sasol management. The memorandum cited concerns related to recruitment, SMME support, CIDB compliance, the linkage system and training opportunities.

Sasol remains committed to fostering strong, meaningful, and solution‑focused engagement with local stakeholders

Here is the full memorandum:

BOKAMOSO – KINROSS FENCE LINE COMMUNITIES

PROGRAMME DIRECTOR / LEAD REPRESENTATIVE TO READ:

1. BACKGROUND

Sasol is widely recognised as a company that upholds a world-class governance and compliance framework. However, engagement with the Bokamoso Project Fenceline communities commenced only at a very late stage of the project, in October 2026. In light of the recent incidents and the manner in which Sasol has engaged with the communities, it appears that these engagements served largely as delaying tactics while the company continued to pursue its intention of excluding the primary beneficiaries, the Fenceline communities, thereby resulting in the current dispute.

• The Bokamoso Project commenced within our locality without structured inclusion of recognised stakeholder representatives.
• When the community reacted in frustration and halted operations, Sasol intervened and requested formal engagement.
• We responded responsibly.
• Seven delegates were appointed, including recognised Bokamoso stakeholder representatives.
• It was agreed that the project would remain stopped until outstanding matters were resolved.
• We honoured that agreement.

2. OUR GOOD FAITH

• When Sasol later issued a notice stating that the project would resume regardless and that any disruption would be prevented by all means necessary, tensions rose again.
• Community leadership persuaded residents not to return to the site.
• We chose dialogue over confrontation.
• We honoured peace.
• We honoured process.
• We honoured leadership.

But our good faith has not been met with tangible implementation.

3. OUR CORE CONCERNS

1. The Bokamoso Project commenced without inclusion of Kinross fence line communities, contrary to commitments made by Sasol. Contractors identified on site included TW Group (Trichard) and Comfort Loo (Gauteng).
2. Minimum requirements such as Grade 12 for general workers are exclusionary and insulting to the community, particularly given that similar requirements are not consistently applied within Sasol mining operations.
3. The Sasol Project Manager has consistently protected currently appointed subcontractors and did not afford Stefanutti Stocks an opportunity to respond, despite our recommendation. It is not even clear how the current subcontractors were appointed
4. The Site Manager from Stefanutti Stocks indicated that there is no contractual obligation to work with the local community, which is deeply concerning. However with extreme interventions we started seeing changes however, are we going to experience this throughout the entire project with all the contractors appointed?
5. Stefanutti Stocks is currently delivering projects successfully with communities in Morgenzon and Bethal. The exclusionary approach on the Bokamoso Project therefore raises serious questions regarding internal influence and alignment.
6. To date a detailed Scope of Work providing only a high-level overview, which undermines meaningful community participation and denying the community the opportunity to position themselves.
7. Fence line businesses are systematically excluded from information sharing, limiting preparedness and engagement.
8. Discrepancies were noted between two recruitment adverts for the CLO role, yet an appointment proceeded regardless.
9. Advertising local labour opportunities via social media attracts non-local applicants and undermines community inclusion.
10. We need to indicate that Fence line businesses cannot be restricted to equipment hire (yellow machines) but to execute work, and promote skills transfer, gaining of experience and growth.
11. Affected farm residents have expressed distress that work is taking place directly adjacent to their homes, yet none of their households or neighbours were considered for employment. This contradicts statements made during the meeting that local farm labour was utilised.

A. Direct Engagement With the Main Contractor

Fence Line businesses are denied direct engagement with Stefanutti Stocks.

• All engagement is filtered through Sasol.
• Transparency requires direct accountability between implementing contractors and affected communities.

B. Appointment of External Companies

External companies have been appointed while capable Fence Line companies remain excluded.

We were informed that currently subcontracted companies would be removed and replaced with qualifying Fence Line companies.

To date:

• No written transition plan has been tabled
• No exit strategy has been presented
• No timelines have been communicated

Without a formal plan, this promise remains unimplemented while the project progresses.

C. Delays and Red Tape

RFQs have been issued, and we acknowledge that step.

However:

• Repeated advertisements, Inconsistent CIDB grading requirements, Long delays in appointments, create uncertainty and weaken trust.

Five weeks later, no Fence Line contractor has been appointed as a primary beneficiary.

D. Payment Terms for SMMEs

• Emerging local businesses cannot survive on 60-day payment terms.
• Meaningful SMME development requires payment terms aligned to 14–30 days.
• Development without financial sustainability is not development.

E. Recruitment Transparency

• We were informed of strong local labour targets.
• Currently, only nine out of approximately forty-two general workers are from Kinross.
• We require transparency in recruitment processes.
• We require clarity on labour targets and implementation plans.

F. Absence of a Formal Fence-Line Inclusion Strategy

• There is no formally documented framework governing how main contractors must include Fence Line businesses.
• Rules are imposed on the community.

But there is no structured guideline protecting the community. –        This must change.

4. OUR DEMANDS

We therefore formally demand:

1. A written Local Participation Implementation Plan.
2. A documented subcontractor transition and exit strategy with timelines on current subcontracting with the existing contractor.
3. A structured framework for direct engagement between Fence Line businesses and the main contractor with real opportunities enabling the subcontractors growth, not supply of equipment only.
4. Alignment of SMME payment terms to sustainable timeframes stipulated with the main contractors.
5. Clear requirements on all opportunities that does not deny local SMME participation
6. Transparent labour recruitment statistics and clear targets with a more progressive inclusion of Fenceline community members.
7. Recruitment of Local Community people in advance of upcoming opportunities to have enough time for the processes.
8. Advertisement of labour must not be advertised on social media but through Fenceline community notice boards, forums and sent to the community leadership 
9. A structured Community Skills Development Plan within the Mining Projects environment.
10. Weekly written progress reports until full implementation.
11. Immediate removal of non-fenceline community sub-contracting companies (TW Group and Comfort Loo), and ensure compliance with B-BBEE commission, DMRE-SLP
12. All fenceline community companies must be prioritised as per promise made in October 2025.

5. OUR POSITION

• We do not oppose development.
• We do not oppose investment.
• We do not oppose Sasol.
• We oppose exclusion.
• We oppose inconsistency.
• We oppose unfulfilled commitments.
• The Bokamoso Project is happening in our community.
• Our people must benefit meaningfully. –           Not symbolically.

6. FINAL STATEMENT

We remain open to engagement. We remain open to structured resolution. But today we formally place on record that our patience is not weakness. Our unity is not aggression. It is accountability.

We request a written response within seven working days addressing each demand raised in this memorandum.

We thank you.

Submitted by:

Kinross Fence Line Communities

Bokamoso Stakeholder Representatives

Kinross Business Forum Leadership