Ann: Agreement with Tanzanian Government to progress Nachu, page-319

CNBC is an example of formal ... media ... that has ... distorted and ... misrepresented the facts.
Each question the interviewer asks is a fishing question, trying to raise some scandal and in each case Frank ignores the bait and give a reasoned answer.
CNBC: It almost seems to good to be true Frank, because you're the only business in Tanzania with this licence you describe. How do you think this is going to impact the business and it's operations there and specifically, is MNS and MTT [...] fully exempt from all of those mining laws that were announced and enacted in Tanzania last year?
FP (paraphrased to remove repition): So, we're not the only business that has it. This is a manufacturing licence. We're the only potential graphite producer that has this licence, so there are other companies involve in other industries that have this licence [...]. It falls under a different ministry to the Ministry of Mines. [... and then he explains the different roles of the subsidiaries]

So the interviewer simply asks: is MNS [...] fully exempt from all of those mining laws ...
He doesn't imply that MNS thinks they are exempt.
Frank has to point out that the manufacturing licence is not unique - just the one for a graphite producer.
The video than ends (i.e. is clipped at that point). So whether or not FP did comment about exemption cannot be stated from that clip.

The EPZA is not criticising MNS, it is defending itself.