Search Climate Insights Directory

The National Environmental Compliance and Enforcement Report 2014-15 details the activities of South Africa's 'Green Scorpions' (EMIs). It reports a 19.8% increase in registered EMIs to 2,294 and highlights a rise in criminal dockets by 8.5%. The report identifies illegal hunting and unlawful commencement of listed activities as the most prevalent crimes. It also documents specific industrial inspections, biodiversity enforcement focusing on rhinoceros and cycads, and the implementation of capacity-building programs for law enforcement and judicial officers.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), representing various community and environmental groups, submitted formal objections to Eskom's application to vary the Atmospheric Emission Licence (AEL) for the Kriel Power Station. The CER argues that the requested increase in particulate matter (PM) emissions would exacerbate poor air quality in the Highveld Priority Area, cause significant health impacts, and result from Eskom's own poor planning rather than a genuine emergency.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) provides a detailed critique of the proposed Technical Regulations for Petroleum Exploration and Exploitation published by the South African Minister of Mineral Resources on 15 October 2013. The CER argues that the regulations are non-binding guidelines rather than enforceable laws, lack sufficient environmental impact assessment requirements, and fail to provide for meaningful public participation or access to information. The document suggests that fracking-specific regulations should be promulgated under a broader suite of environmental laws, including NEMA, NEMWA, and the National Water Act, rather than solely under the MPRDA.

The Centre for Environmental Rights argues that South Africa's proposed fracking regulations are flawed because they rely on industry standards rather than a comprehensive legal framework. The document recommends that fracking be regulated under a suite of environmental laws (NEMA, NWA, NEMWA, NEMAQA) rather than just the MPRDA, and suggests the creation of a specialised inter-departmental unit for monitoring and enforcement. Key requirements include mandatory baseline measurements for water and air quality, public disclosure of fracking fluid chemicals, a prohibition on using potable water, and significant financial guarantees for rehabilitation.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) published a set of Minimum Requirements for the Regulation of the Environmental Impacts of Fracking in December 2013 to address the potentially severe effects of the shale gas industry.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), supported by the Environmental Monitoring Group and the Federation for a Sustainable Environment, submitted comments on the draft Infrastructure Development Bill (B49-2013). The CER argues that the Bill violates Constitutional rights, disregards national environmental policies, and undermines the legal framework for sustainable development and integrated environmental management in South Africa.

The report finds a decline in the effective implementation of PAIA in South Africa, with a record low of 16% of requests released in full and a significant rise in 'deemed refusals' where information holders fail to respond. It highlights systemic failures in records management and a lack of resources and training within public bodies, while also noting high non-compliance regarding the publication of mandatory PAIA manuals.

The Minamata Convention on Mercury is a global treaty established to protect human health and the environment from the adverse effects of mercury.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) is challenging Eskom's application to postpone or be exempt from minimum emission standards (MES) for sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and particulate matter across 17 power stations. CER argues that Eskom's current process lacks necessary health and environmental risk assessments and provides insufficient time for public consultation, which could make any resulting government decision subject to judicial review under the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act (PAJA).

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) submitted comments to the Portfolio Committee on Mineral Resources regarding the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Amendment Bill, 2013. The CER criticizes the Department of Mineral Resources (DMR) for failing to meaningfully consult civil society and mining-affected communities, identifies numerous drafting errors in the Bill, and provides detailed legal objections to proposed changes concerning environmental authorizations, penalty regimes, and the granting of mining rights.

A joint submission by five environmental and social justice organisations to the South African Portfolio Committee on Mineral Resources, asserting that the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Amendment Bill [B15-2013] does not rectify systemic failures in administrative justice. The authors argue that the Bill maintains inadequate consultation timeframes, restricts access to critical mining application data, and fails to protect the rights of rural and marginalized communities against the interests of mining companies and traditional authorities.

The submission contends that the Department of Mineral Resources (DMR) lacks the human resource capacity, budget, and track record to effectively implement the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA) and its EIA regulations. It highlights a conflict of interest between the DMR's mandate to promote mining and its obligation to protect the environment, citing poor decision-making in sensitive areas and negligible compliance monitoring. The authors argue that transferring these powers to the DMR would be an inefficient use of public funds and potentially unconstitutional, as it impinges on provincial mandates. They recommend that the Minister of Environmental Affairs and provincial Executive Councils remain the sole authorities for issuing and enforcing environmental authorisations.

A joint submission by environmental organisations to the South African Portfolio Committee on Mineral Resources regarding the MPRDA Amendment Bill. The authors support the principle that mining right holders remain responsible for environmental liabilities regardless of a closure certificate but strongly oppose a proposed 20-year limit on the Minister's ability to retain financial provisions for latent impacts, arguing that such a period is arbitrary and often insufficient to cover long-term issues like acid mine drainage.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), representing several community and environmental groups, submitted comments on August 23, 2013, regarding uMoya-NILU Consulting's Plan of Study (PoS). The PoS was designed to support Eskom's applications for exemptions and postponements of Minimum Emission Standards (MES) for its power stations. The CER argues that the PoS is too narrow in scope, fails to include critical pollutants like PM2.5, uses inappropriate modelling software for near-field impacts, and lacks a mechanism to verify model outputs against real-world ambient measurements.

A notice of appeal submitted by BirdLife South Africa to the Minister of Mineral Resources on 30 July 2013, challenging the Director-General's decision to grant a mining right (MP 30/5/1/2/2/505 MR) to William Patrick Bower (Pty) Ltd for coal mining in the Belfast district of Mpumalanga Province.

The World Wide Fund for Nature South Africa (WWF-SA), represented by the Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), filed an internal appeal to the Department of Mineral Resources (DMR) on 26 July 2013. The appeal challenges the DMR's refusal to grant access to records regarding seabed prospecting rights and strategies in South Africa's territorial waters and Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), which the DMR claimed would substantially and unreasonably divert its resources.

The document argues that Eskom's applications for emission standard postponements and exemptions are legally invalid because ambient air quality standards (AAQS) are already exceeded in the affected priority areas. It highlights significant health risks, particularly from SO2 and mercury, and criticizes Eskom for failing to consider feasible alternatives such as renewable energy or decommissioning worst-performing plants. The submission also references a World Bank Inspection Panel report on the Medupi Power Plant, which found inadequate consideration of environmental principles, water scarcity risks, and cumulative health impacts.

The Centre for Environmental Rights submitted an Answering Statement on behalf of Earthlife Africa, Johannesburg, appealing the authorisation of the 1200MW coal-fired Thabametsi Power Station in Limpopo Province, South Africa. The submission responds to a statement by Newshelf 1282 (Pty) Limited and complies with the 2010 Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) warns the Minister of Mineral Resources that the commencement of the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Amendment Act, 2008 (MPRDAA) on 7 June 2013 has created a regulatory void. Because certain sections were deleted while the introduction of new environmental authorisation requirements (sections 5A and 38A) was suspended for 18 months, it is currently no longer a legal requirement or a criminal offence to prospect or mine without an approved Environmental Management Plan (EMP) or Environmental Management Programme (EMPR). The CER argues this violates section 24 of the Constitution and poses imminent risks to the environment, urging the Minister to amend the Presidential Proclamation of 31 May 2013 to restore these protections.

The KwaZulu-Natal Planning and Development Amendment Bill, 2013, proposes various amendments to the KwaZulu-Natal Planning and Development Act, 2008. It focuses on refining land consolidation and subdivision processes, updating public notice requirements, clarifying the roles of the Surveyor-General and Registrar of Deeds, and establishing transitional measures for older planning ordinances and the Development Facilitation Act, 1995.