Environmental Rights Blog: Bulldozing environmental rights by fast-tracking infrastructure development will cost us dearly

Report an error

Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

The Centre for Environmental Rights criticises the draft Infrastructure Development Bill for omitting references to sustainable development and imposing a strict 250-day authorisation timeline for special infrastructure projects (SIPs). The author contends that these fast-tracked processes bypass necessary scientific assessments and public consultations, potentially violating constitutional rights to a healthy environment and just administrative action. The document warns that inadequate environmental planning for projects like mines and power stations will lead to long-term state liabilities and disproportionately affect vulnerable communities.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • The draft Infrastructure Development Bill facilitates the implementation of special infrastructure projects (SIPs), which include high-risk developments such as power stations, refineries, mines, and oil and gas pipelines, yet the text contains no mention of sustainable development.
  • The Bill establishes a mandatory 250-day timeframe from project plan approval to regulatory decision, which the author argues is insufficient for responsible scientific assessment of air quality and water resources or for meaningful public consultation.
  • The proposed fast-tracking mechanism may create a conflict of interest for government departments tasked with protecting environment and water resources, as it encourages the avoidance of intergovernmental disputes to ensure approvals are granted.
  • The Centre for Environmental Rights identifies three primary areas where the Bill may be vulnerable to Constitutional challenges: the right to an environment not harmful to health, the right to just administrative action, and cooperative governance provisions regarding local land use planning.

Cite the original document

APA
Melissa (2013). Environmental Rights Blog: Bulldozing environmental rights by fast-tracking infrastructure development will cost us dearly. Centre for Environmental Rights. https://cer.org.za/news/environmental-rights-blog-bulldozing-environmental-rights-by-fast-tracking-infrastructure-development-will-cost-us-dearly
Chicago
Melissa. Environmental Rights Blog: Bulldozing environmental rights by fast-tracking infrastructure development will cost us dearly. Centre for Environmental Rights, 2013. https://cer.org.za/news/environmental-rights-blog-bulldozing-environmental-rights-by-fast-tracking-infrastructure-development-will-cost-us-dearly.
Wikipedia
{{cite press release |last1=Melissa |title=Environmental Rights Blog: Bulldozing environmental rights by fast-tracking infrastructure development will cost us dearly |publisher=Centre for Environmental Rights |date=28 March 2013 |url=https://cer.org.za/news/environmental-rights-blog-bulldozing-environmental-rights-by-fast-tracking-infrastructure-development-will-cost-us-dearly |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@misc{melissa2013environmental, author = {Melissa}, title = {{Environmental Rights Blog: Bulldozing environmental rights by fast-tracking infrastructure development will cost us dearly}}, publisher = {Centre for Environmental Rights}, year = {2013}, month = mar, url = {https://cer.org.za/news/environmental-rights-blog-bulldozing-environmental-rights-by-fast-tracking-infrastructure-development-will-cost-us-dearly}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated