The recent decision to revoke the environmental permit for the Laivakangas gold mine in the Finnish town of Raahe has now been formally appealed. The case is now pending before the Vaasa Administrative Court, following appeals submitted by both the mine’s operator, Laiva Gold, and the Northern Ostrobothnia Centre for Economic Development, Transport and the Environment (ELY Centre) – the authority that originally requested the revocation.
Laivakangas is a gold mine located in the Mattilanperä area, previously part of the former municipality of Salois. Construction of the mine began in spring 2010, and production was launched in 2011. The first gold bar was poured on 27 December that same year.
In April, the Regional State Administrative Agency of Northern Finland (AVI) announced that it was revoking the mine’s environmental permits. The decision was based on repeated and long-standing environmental violations that authorities said were incompatible with the conditions originally set for the mining operation.
Unclear transition rules and legal fate of financial guarantees
While the ELY Centre supports the core of the decision, namely the cancellation of the permit, it has still chosen to appeal certain parts of the ruling that remain ambiguous.
– We are satisfied with the main outcome, meaning the permit was revoked as we requested, but two aspects remain unclear, said Juha Kangaskokko, Senior Inspector at the ELY Centre.
One of these concerns is the legal framework that should apply during the transition phase. Although active mining has ceased, the site continues to pose environmental risks, in particular, the need to manage water treatment and runoff from the area remains.
– The situation becomes unclear if there are no valid permit conditions in place and everything is simply abandoned. We believe that is not how this should work. There needs to be clarity about which permit regulations apply during the transitional period, Kangaskokko said.
He emphasised that if no binding permit terms remain in place, there is a risk that environmental protection measures could be interrupted or halted entirely. The ELY Centre argues that previous regulations should remain valid until new legal conditions are formally established.
The second issue raised in the appeal concerns the financial guarantees that were tied to the mine’s permits – these were designed to cover the costs of environmental remediation and post-closure management.
– The AVI’s decision specifically cancelled those permit decisions that included the requirement for setting financial securities. It is unclear what will happen to these, Kangaskokko said.
In other words, by annulling the permits that outlined the financial obligations, the legal status of these guarantees has been left uncertain. The ELY Centre warns that without further clarification, there is a risk the guarantees could lapse or lose enforceability, undermining efforts to ensure environmental cleanup.
Laiva Gold challenges full revocation of the mining permit
The mining company Laiva Gold, which operates the Laivakangas site, has also filed an appeal, but for a different purpose. The company is seeking to have the permit revocation overturned entirely.
In a written statement to Finnish broadcaster Yle, Laiva Gold’s director Jim Jackson said the company hopes the Vaasa Administrative Court will annul the decision.
According to Jackson, the company remains committed to resolving the issues identified by the ELY Centre.
The permit revocation was based on environmental violations found to have occurred over a prolonged period, in breach of the conditions attached to the mine’s operation.
Now the court must examine both the company’s request to reinstate the permits and the authority’s call for greater legal clarity concerning the transitional period and financial securities.
No timeline has yet been provided for when the Vaasa Administrative Court will issue a final decision.
Source: Yle
