annexure-a-daad896e9aecda78.pdf

The Legal Resources Centre (LRC), representing a coalition of civil society, labour, and community organisations, submitted a series of formal requests to the South African Parliament and Presidency between March 2014 and February 2015. The LRC challenged the constitutionality of the Mining and Petroleum Resources Development Amendment Bill (MPRDAB) and the Restitution of Land Rights Amendment Bill, arguing that the National Council of Provinces (NCOP) and provincial legislatures failed to facilitate reasonable public participation. The documents detail specific concerns regarding the removal of community participation rights in mining, the discretionary nature of water use licenses, and the influence of industry lobbying over legislative changes.

• The LRC and its coalition argue that the Mining and Petroleum Resources Development Amendment Bill (MPRDAB) was passed unconstitutionally because the NCOP and provincial legislatures failed to provide reasonable opportunities for public involvement, citing a highly compressed consultation period and insufficient notice of hearings.
• The LRC contends that the 'B' version of the MPRDAB detrimentally altered the bill by removing the possibility for communities to participate in mining and eliminating the Minister's power to require mining companies to address the socio-economic needs of host communities.
• The LRC objects to the insertion of the phrase 'where necessary' in 16 places within the MPRDAB, arguing that it makes applications for water use licenses discretionary based on the views of the Department of Mineral Resources (DMR) or mining companies, thereby undermining the authority of the Department of Water Affairs.
• The LRC alleges that the DMR and the Chamber of Mines influenced legislative changes outside of the parliamentary process, citing a presentation by BHP Billiton Energy Coal SA (BECSA) during public hearings that acknowledged 'constructive engagements' with the DMR to address concerns.
• Regarding living customary law, the LRC argues that consultation must not be limited to the House of Traditional Leaders, as the Constitution requires that the content of such law be sought from the communities who live the law.
• The LRC requested that President Zuma refer the MPRDAB and the Restitution of Land Rights Amendment Bill back to Parliament, asserting that the rush to pass the bills before the end of the Fourth Parliament did not justify the truncation of public participation.

APA

Centre for Environmental Rights (n.d.). annexure-a-daad896e9aecda78.pdf. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Annexure-A.pdf?x21779

Chicago

Centre for Environmental Rights. annexure-a-daad896e9aecda78.pdf. n.d. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Annexure-A.pdf?x21779.

Wikipedia

{{cite press release |author=Centre for Environmental Rights |title=annexure-a-daad896e9aecda78.pdf |url=https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Annexure-A.pdf?x21779 |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@misc{centreforenvironmentalrightsndannexureadaad896e9aecda78pdf, author = {{Centre for Environmental Rights}}, title = {{annexure-a-daad896e9aecda78.pdf}}, publisher = {Centre for Environmental Rights}, url = {https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Annexure-A.pdf?x21779}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }