LIMPOPO COAL COMPANY – MAPUNGUBWE

This case study details the legal challenges brought by a coalition of environmental and civil society organizations against Limpopo Coal (Pty) Ltd, a subsidiary of Coal of Africa (CoAL), regarding the establishment of the Vele colliery in Musina, Limpopo Province. The challenges span four distinct legal processes involving mining rights, environmental management programmes (EMP), water use licences (WUL), and compliance with nature reserve protections.

• A coalition of environmental and civil society organizations is challenging the Vele colliery project. This coalition includes the Mapungubwe Action Group (MAG), Endangered Wildlife Trust (EWT), Association of Southern African Professional Archeologists (ASAPA), Peace Parks Foundation (PPF), World Wide Fund for Nature (South Africa) (WWF), Birdlife South Africa (BSA), the Wilderness Foundation, South Africa (WFSA), and the University of Pretoria.
• The Vele colliery project, spanning approximately 8,500 hectares, is located in Musina, Limpopo Province, and will at one point be 7km from the borders of the Mapungubwe National Park. The area is noted for its biodiversity and historical and archeological significance.
• The project has faced multiple legal challenges regarding its authorizations: an appeal against the mining right granted on 10 March 2009 and the EMP approved on 29 March 2010; interdict proceedings in the South Gauteng High Court launched on 3 August 2010; and an appeal against a water use licence (WUL) granted on 29 March 2011.
• Limpopo Coal was issued a Compliance Notice by the Environmental Management Inspectorate (Green Scorpions) for commencing activities without NEMA authorization, including the construction of roads, a sludge dam, a water pipeline network, and activities within the 1:10 year floodline of the Limpopo River. The company subsequently paid an administrative fine of R9.24 million to the DEA on approximately 11 May 2011.
• The project is contested on the grounds that it is situated on land proclaimed as private nature reserves (Skutwater and Sighetti Nature Reserves) in 1965. Under section 28(1)(a) of the Limpopo Environmental Management Act 7 of 2003 (LEMA), mining is prohibited on private nature reserves.
• Appellants argue that the public participation and consultation process was superficial, noting that the only change between the pre-consultation and post-consultation versions of the EMP was the distance between the mine and Mapungubwe on page 45 of the 180-page document.
• The appeal against the water use licence (WUL) in the Water Tribunal is based on 17 grounds, including the failure to adequately consider climate change, water security, food security, and the impacts on other water users.
• The project is alleged to have ignored the restitution claim of the Ga-Machete community for farms Bergen op Zoom 124, Overvlakte 125, and Semple, which was referred to the Land Claims Court on 1 October 2009.

APA

Centre for Environmental Rights (n.d.). LIMPOPO COAL COMPANY – MAPUNGUBWE. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Limpopo-Coal-Company-Mapungubwe.pdf?x21779

Chicago

Centre for Environmental Rights. LIMPOPO COAL COMPANY – MAPUNGUBWE. n.d. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Limpopo-Coal-Company-Mapungubwe.pdf?x21779.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=Centre for Environmental Rights |title=LIMPOPO COAL COMPANY – MAPUNGUBWE |url=https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Limpopo-Coal-Company-Mapungubwe.pdf?x21779 |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{centreforenvironmentalrightsndlimpopo, author = {{Centre for Environmental Rights}}, title = {{LIMPOPO COAL COMPANY – MAPUNGUBWE}}, institution = {Centre for Environmental Rights}, url = {https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Limpopo-Coal-Company-Mapungubwe.pdf?x21779}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }