Search Climate Insights Directory

A coalition of 13 NGOs argues that the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act (MPRDA) provides an inferior environmental regulatory regime compared to the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA). They call for the integration of mining under NEMA to ensure comprehensive environmental impact assessments, better public participation, and higher penalties for non-compliance. The submission also requests specific safeguards for environmentally sensitive areas and improved public access to mining application documents.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) and 12 other organisations are urging the South African Minister of Mineral Resources to exercise discretion under section 49 of the Minerals and Petroleum Resources Development Act (MPRDA) to create 'no-go areas' for mining based on environmental sensitivity. The CER rejects claims by the Chamber of Mines that existing laws—such as the Protected Areas Act, the Biodiversity Act, and Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs)—provide sufficient protection, noting that rights have been granted illegally in protected areas and that the Biodiversity Act often only triggers an EIA without providing further legal protection. The CER asserts that a section 49 declaration is the only way to prevent wasted costs for the state and industry by refusing applications in sensitive areas from the outset, citing the Minister's intention to declare the Chrissiesmeer Biodiversity Site as a precedent.

The Magaliesberg Protection Association (MPA) is pursuing a judicial review in the Mafikeng High Court to overturn the MEC's decision to allow the 'rectification' of the Kgaswane Country Lodge, a ± 50 bedroom hotel built illegally in a 'highly sensitive' area of the Magaliesberg Protected Environment. Despite an unsuccessful application for an interdict to stop construction, the MPA argues that the approval violates the area's Environmental Management Framework and sets a dangerous precedent for other illegal developments. The legal process has cost approximately R260,000 to date, with an estimated total cost of R400,000, funded by donations and guarantees from hiking and mountaineering clubs.

The Centre for Environmental Rights is urging the Inter-Ministerial Committee on Acid Mine Drainage to respond to concerns raised by a coalition of 34 civil society organisations and to publish a report from a team of experts. The letter warns that legal action may be pursued if a satisfactory response is not provided to prevent the release of toxic acid mine drainage into watercourses.

The document argues that protecting critical biodiversity and hydrological areas from mining is in the national interest and essential for climate change mitigation and adaptation. It proposes a list of areas for total prohibition and a set of procedural restrictions for other sensitive zones to improve decision-making and environmental oversight.

The document is a formal letter from a coalition of civil society organisations to the co-chairs of the Inter Ministerial Committee on Acid Mine Drainage (IMC), expressing alarm over the uncontrolled decant of untreated acid mine drainage (AMD) in the Witwatersrand Basin. The authors argue that the State has failed its constitutional obligations to protect the environment and public health, citing a lack of transparency, the exclusion of civil society, and unreasonable delays in implementing treatment solutions. They specifically criticize the preference for 'neutralisation' as an inadequate short-term fix and highlight ecological crises such as fish kills in the Cradle of Humankind World Heritage Site and pollution at the Grootvlei mine. The letter demands the public release of expert reports and a decision on treatment proposals by 2 February 2011, threatening legal action if these demands are not met.

The Water Tribunal dismissed an appeal by the Escarpment Environmental Protection Group and Wonderfontein Environmental Committee against a water use licence granted to Exarro Coal (Pty) Ltd. The Tribunal ruled that the appellants lacked locus standi based on a strict, literal interpretation of section 148(1)(f) of the National Water Act 36 of 1998, concluding that a liberal interpretation would improperly usurp legislative powers.

The Water Tribunal dismissed an appeal by the Escarpment Environmental Protection Group and the Langkloof Environmental Committee against a water use licence issued to WERM Mining (Pty) Ltd. The Tribunal ruled that the appellants lacked locus standi because the National Water Act 36 of 1998 limits the right of appeal to specific persons, and no right of appeal arises for objectors if no notice was published in the media as required by section 41(4) of the Act. The Tribunal further determined that the National Environmental Management Act 107 of 1998 and the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, 2000 did not extend the right to internal appeal in this statutory context.

The report finds that while civil society usage of PAIA for strategic advocacy has increased, the performance of information holders has declined, characterized by a high rate of 'deemed refusals' and a lack of affordable appeal mechanisms.

The Centre for Environmental Rights and other NGOs contend that the JSE's SRI Index undermines environmental regulation by listing companies that are non-compliant with environmental laws. They propose that the Index should require legal compliance as a minimum qualification, implement independent methods to identify enforcement actions using public data, and require companies to self-report environmental violations and fines annually. The document highlights that environmental non-compliance is price-sensitive information, citing a 19% drop in Coal of Africa Limited shares in November 2010 following enforcement action.

A coalition of environmental NGOs argues that the JSE's SRI Index is 'fatally flawed' because it includes companies that are 'serious and serial offenders' of environmental legislation. The letter provides evidence from National Environmental Compliance and Enforcement Reports (NECERs) and government reports showing that several listed companies—including Exxaro Resources, Arcelor Mittal South Africa, and Sasol—have committed criminal offences related to air emissions, waste disposal, and water use licenses. The NGOs call for the JSE to revise its criteria to explicitly require legal compliance and strengthen its verification methods.

The Revised Social and Labour Plan Guidelines outline the mandatory components and reporting requirements for mining and production right applicants in South Africa. The guidelines focus on four primary areas: Human Resource Development, Mine Community Economic Development, the management of downscaling and retrenchment, and financial provision. Key requirements include the implementation of skills development plans, the achievement of a 40% demographic representation of Historically Disadvantaged South Africans (HDSA) in management and core skills by 2014, and the alignment of community projects with Integrated Development Plans (IDPs). Additionally, the guidelines mandate the establishment of 'Future Forums' to manage potential job losses and require detailed financial commitments in Rand for all SLP components.

The Magaliesberg Protection Association (MPA) is pursuing a judicial review in the Mafikeng High Court to set aside the environmental authorisation of the Kgaswane Country Lodge, a ± 50 bedroom hotel built illegally in a 'highly sensitive' area of the Magaliesberg Protected Environment (MPE). Despite the development being designated as an 'incompatible activity' by the Department's own Environmental Management Framework (EMF), the MEC dismissed the MPA's appeal on 5 February 2010. The MPA's legal action, filed on 4 August 2010, seeks an interdict to stop ongoing construction and an order for the lodge's demolition and environmental rehabilitation. The MPA estimates the total legal costs at approximately R300,000, funded through donations and guarantees from organisations including the MCSA and the Johannesburg Hiking Club.

In a letter to the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs, Gareth Morgan MP disputes government claims that air quality in St Helena Bay is safe. He argues that fish factories emit toxic hydrogen sulphide (H2S) and sulphur dioxide (SO2), which accumulate due to factory operating patterns and cause severe respiratory and neurological damage. Morgan highlights the vulnerability of children and the lack of government investigation into health impacts, citing international studies to link these emissions to conditions such as Bronchiolitis Obliterans and potential carcinogenic effects. He demands that factories stop using rotten fish, improve cleanliness, and install scrubber systems.

The Centre for Environmental Rights and a coalition of environmental NGOs are urging the South African government to use legislative powers to prohibit mining in areas of critical biodiversity and hydrological value. They offer to provide scientific evidence and a list of sensitive areas to assist a government task team in improving environmental compliance and sustainable development in the mining sector.

The paper analyzes the implementation of South Africa's Promotion of Access to Information Act (PAIA), noting a preference for a judicial enforcement model over an independent commission. It details a period of fluctuating litigation from 2005 to 2009, highlighting a shift from disputes over substantive exemptions to procedural issues. A key development is the November 2009 extension of PAIA enforcement to Magistrates' Courts, intended to increase accessibility for the general population. The author contrasts South Africa's relatively low routine usage of access to information laws with the massive uptake in India.

This document is an excerpt from the Government Gazette of South Africa, dated 8 March 2010, presenting the preamble and the first article of the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal. It outlines the international agreement's goals to protect human health and the environment by reducing the generation of hazardous wastes and strictly controlling their movement across borders.

The Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) dismissed an appeal by Bengwenyama Minerals, ruling that while section 96 of the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act (MPRDA) provides for an internal appeal process, the appellants failed to exhaust this remedy or seek condonation for late submission, rendering their subsequent review application under the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act (PAJA) out of time. The court also rejected the claim that the application was a 'community application' under section 104 of the MPRDA, as the initial application provided no evidence to alert the Department of Mineral Resources to this status. Additionally, the court made an obiter remark suggesting that the requirement for financial resources to conduct prospecting optimally under section 17(1)(a) of the MPRDA excludes the financial provision for environmental rehabilitation, though the commentary notes that the Constitutional Court later contradicted this by confirming environmental impacts are jurisdictional facts.

The court ruled that mining is a land use subject to municipal planning and that the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act does not override the Land Use Planning Ordinance or the National Environmental Management Act.

The Environmental Management Framework Regulations, 2010, establish the legal process for creating, adopting, and using environmental management frameworks (EMFs) in South Africa. These frameworks are designed to map environmental attributes and guide land-use decisions to promote sustainability and environmental protection.