Search Climate Insights Directory

This answering statement, submitted by the Centre for Environmental Rights on behalf of several appellants, challenges an environmental authorisation granted to Atha Africa Ventures (Pty) Ltd for the proposed Yzermyn coal mine. The appellants argue that the project has significant implications for international environmental commitments, suffers from material gaps in specialist information—particularly regarding acid mine drainage and subsidence—and was determined by an incorrect competent authority.

This responding statement, submitted by the Centre for Environmental Rights on behalf of eight appellants, challenges the Department of Mineral Resources' (DMR) approval of the Environmental Management Programme (EMPR) for Atha-Africa Ventures (Pty) Ltd's proposed Yzermyn mine. The appellants argue that the approved EMPR authorizes an environmentally destructive discard dump, ignores extensive government conservation policies for the area, and contains woefully inadequate financial provisions for rehabilitation.

This document is a statement of grounds of appeal filed by eight environmental and community organisations against an environmental authorisation (EA) granted on 7 June 2016 to Atha Africa Ventures (Pty) Ltd for the Yzermyn underground coal mine near Wakkerstroom, Mpumalanga. The appellants argue that the EA was granted without lawful authority, based on a deficient Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR), and ignores critical biodiversity and socio-economic risks.

A notice of appeal filed on 30 March 2015 by eight environmental organisations, represented by the Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), challenging the grant of mining right MP30/5/1/2/2/1/0069MR to Atha-Africa Ventures (Pty) Ltd (AAV). The appeal seeks to set aside and suspend the right for the proposed Yzermyn underground coal mine, arguing that the grant is unlawful and irrational given the area's extreme environmental sensitivity, its status as a protected environment, and the lack of required ministerial consent.

The document details a legal challenge in the Western Cape High Court against a proposed 3D seismic survey by TGS Geophysical Company. The applicants argue that the authorisation was unlawful due to a lack of proper delegation of authority and a failure to consider the National Environmental Management: Integrated Coastal Management Act. Key concerns include the physical and behavioural impact of airgun noise on marine mammals and fish, the creation of exclusion zones harming small-scale fishers, and the government's failure to account for climate change commitments under the Paris Agreement and the economic risk of stranded assets in a decarbonising world.

Natural Justice submitted written comments to the National Environmental Management Authority (NEMA) challenging the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) for the proposed Nairobi Expressway Project. The organization argues that the ESIA is fundamentally flawed due to the absence of a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA), inadequate baseline data, a lack of alternatives analysis, and insufficient public participation, concluding that the report cannot serve as a reasonable basis for issuing an EIA Licence.

The document details a legal challenge in the Western Cape High Court scheduled for March 2026. The applicants argue that the environmental authorisation granted to TotalEnergies for exploration in the Deep Water Orange Basin (DWOB) block ignores climate commitments, underestimates oil spill risks in waters deeper than 2,000 metres, threatens the food security of small-scale fishers in areas like Port Nolloth, and fails to comply with the Integrated Coastal Management Act.