annexure-3a-3f1cef7bc413cd9f.pdf

This legal opinion, prepared for the Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), examines whether 'interested and affected parties' (I&APs) have a legal right to participate in the determination of administrative fines imposed under section 24G of the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA). The authors conclude that while such determinations do not constitute 'administrative action' affecting I&APs under the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act (PAJA), the failure to allow I&APs to make representations may be considered irrational and unlawful under the principle of legality and the Constitution.

• Section 24G of NEMA requires persons who unlawfully commenced a listed or specified activity, or a waste management activity without a license, to apply to the relevant Minister. As part of this process, the applicant must pay an administrative fine determined by the competent authority, which is capped at R5 million.
• The Department of Environmental Affairs uses an internal calculator to determine fines based on five indices: potential social benefit, socio-economic impact, impact on biodiversity, impact on sense of place or heritage significance, and potential pollution resulting from the failure of mitigation measures.
• The authors argue that the determination of a fine under section 24G does not constitute 'administrative action' in respect of I&APs under the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act (PAJA) because it does not 'materially and adversely affect' their rights or have a 'direct' effect on them; any effect is considered indirect, such as the potential lack of a deterrent for future offenders.
• Despite not being 'administrative action' under PAJA, the authors contend that excluding I&APs from the fine-determination process is irrational and unlawful. This is based on NEMA's National Environmental Management Principles, which mandate that the participation of all I&APs in environmental governance must be promoted and their interests, needs, and values considered in decisions.
• The opinion suggests a practical approach to ensure rational decision-making: the department should require section 24G applicants to invite comments on the proposed fine from I&APs who registered during the public participation process for the section 24G report.

APA

Centre for Environmental Rights (n.d.). annexure-3a-3f1cef7bc413cd9f.pdf. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Annexure-3A.pdf?x21779

Chicago

Centre for Environmental Rights. annexure-3a-3f1cef7bc413cd9f.pdf. n.d. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Annexure-3A.pdf?x21779.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=Centre for Environmental Rights |title=annexure-3a-3f1cef7bc413cd9f.pdf |url=https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Annexure-3A.pdf?x21779 |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{centreforenvironmentalrightsndannexure3a3f1cef7bc413cd9fpdf, author = {{Centre for Environmental Rights}}, title = {{annexure-3a-3f1cef7bc413cd9f.pdf}}, institution = {Centre for Environmental Rights}, url = {https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Annexure-3A.pdf?x21779}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }