3-a9158291516a512d.pdf

This document is a legal affidavit and supporting evidence filed by the Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) on behalf of a coalition of environmental organisations. It seeks the review and setting aside of decisions made by a Municipal Planning Tribunal and a Municipal Appeal Authority regarding a land-use change application by Atha-Africa Ventures (Pty) Ltd for the proposed Yzermyn underground coal mine. The applicants argue that the decisions were irrational, procedurally unfair, and failed to consider the strategic environmental and hydrological significance of the area, specifically its location within a Strategic Water Source Area (SWSA) and the Mabola Protected Environment.

• The applicants argue that the Municipal Planning Tribunal and Municipal Appeal Authority failed to refer the land-use application to the Minister as required by section 52 of the Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Act (SPLUMA), despite the project's material impact on national interests.
• The proposed mine area is located within the Wakkerstroom/Luneburg Grasslands endangered ecosystem, which is identified as a threatened ecosystem requiring protection.
• The project area is situated in a high-water yield area, described as 'water factories' that are critical for the overall water supply of South Africa and the functioning of downstream ecosystems.
• The proposed development is claimed to have international implications because the area forms part of the Enkangala Drakensberg SWSA, which feeds the Usutu River System flowing through Swaziland and Mozambique.
• The applicants contend that there was no meaningful public participation process, asserting that a simple newspaper notice does not satisfy the legal requirements for transparent public input.
• The applicants claim the decision-making process was 'incremental' and irrational because the land-use change was only applied for the surface infrastructure property, while the underground mining footprint falls within the Mabola Protected Environment and other properties for which no land-use change was sought.
• The Municipal Appeal Authority is accused of abdicating its constitutional duty by claiming it lacked jurisdiction to consider environmental matters, despite legal precedents requiring municipalities to promote a safe and healthy environment.
• The applicants assert that the environmental report provided by Atha was seriously flawed, as it was undated, unsigned, and failed to mention the area's status as a protected environment buffer zone.

APA

Centre for Environmental Rights (n.d.). 3-a9158291516a512d.pdf. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/3.pdf?x21779

Chicago

Centre for Environmental Rights. 3-a9158291516a512d.pdf. n.d. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/3.pdf?x21779.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=Centre for Environmental Rights |title=3-a9158291516a512d.pdf |url=https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/3.pdf?x21779 |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{centreforenvironmentalrightsnd3a9158291516a512dpdf, author = {{Centre for Environmental Rights}}, title = {{3-a9158291516a512d.pdf}}, institution = {Centre for Environmental Rights}, url = {https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/3.pdf?x21779}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }