FIRST AND SECOND RESPONDENTS’ HEADS OF ARGUMENT

This document contains the heads of argument submitted by the First and Second Respondents (Groundwork Trust and Vukani Environmental Justice Alliance Movement in Action) to the Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa. The respondents argue that the Minister of Environmental Affairs has a legal duty under section 20 of the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act and section 7(2) of the Constitution to promulgate regulations to implement and enforce the Highveld Plan. They seek to uphold a High Court judgment that declared the air quality in the Highveld Priority Area a breach of constitutional rights and ordered the Minister to produce enforcement regulations within 12 months.

• The Highveld Priority Area suffers from dangerous air pollution caused by coal-fired power stations, mines, and heavy industry, which the Department of Environmental Affairs estimates contributes to approximately 10,000 premature deaths annually.
• The Highveld Plan, established in 2012 to reduce air pollution to national ambient air quality standards, has failed to achieve any of its goals by the 2020 deadline because it lacks legally binding enforcement regulations.
• A 2019 Department of Environmental Affairs Impact Assessment concluded that implementation regulations are necessary, noting that the lack of enforcement measures to ensure accountability is the main cause of the plan's failure.
• The respondents argue that section 20 of the Air Quality Act creates a 'power coupled with a duty,' meaning the Minister must exercise her power to make regulations once the objective condition that they are 'necessary' is satisfied.
• The High Court ruled that the poor air quality in the Highveld Priority Area breaches residents' section 24(a) constitutional right to an environment not harmful to health or well-being, and ordered the Minister to promulgate regulations within 12 months.
• The respondents contend that the Minister's failure to finalize regulations—despite draft regulations being circulated in 2021—constitutes an unreasonable delay and a breach of the constitutional duty to perform obligations diligently.

APA

Centre for Environmental Rights (2024). FIRST AND SECOND RESPONDENTS’ HEADS OF ARGUMENT. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Minsisters-Heads-of-Argument-in-the-SCA.pdf?x21779

Chicago

Centre for Environmental Rights. FIRST AND SECOND RESPONDENTS’ HEADS OF ARGUMENT. 2024. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Minsisters-Heads-of-Argument-in-the-SCA.pdf?x21779.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=Centre for Environmental Rights |title=FIRST AND SECOND RESPONDENTS’ HEADS OF ARGUMENT |date=12 February 2024 |url=https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Minsisters-Heads-of-Argument-in-the-SCA.pdf?x21779 |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{centreforenvironmentalrights2024first, author = {{Centre for Environmental Rights}}, title = {{FIRST AND SECOND RESPONDENTS’ HEADS OF ARGUMENT}}, institution = {Centre for Environmental Rights}, year = {2024}, month = feb, url = {https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Minsisters-Heads-of-Argument-in-the-SCA.pdf?x21779}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }