Search Climate Insights Directory

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) is requesting that the Minister of Mineral Resources and Energy delay a decision on a suspension application regarding the Tormin Mine. This request follows a reply from the mining right holders who argue that the CER's internal appeal is defective due to non-compliance with amended MPRDA regulations.

This document is a case study of a High Court judgment from the Eastern Cape Division, Grahamstown, regarding an application by the National Council of Societies for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (NCSPCA) to interdict the transport of live sheep by sea north of the equator.

The Centre for Environmental Rights, acting on behalf of groundWork, has submitted a formal request to the South African Minister of Mineral Resources and Energy for written reasons regarding a Ministerial determination published on 25 September 2020. The determination outlines the procurement of new generation capacity from renewables, storage, gas, and coal based on the Integrated Resource Plan for Electricity 2019–2030 (IRP 2019). The request specifically challenges the inclusion of new fossil fuel capacity and seeks justification for the timing and scale of these allocations.

A legal notice from MacRobert Inc, acting on behalf of ArcelorMittal South Africa (Pty) Ltd (AMSA), addressed to the Minister of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries regarding an appeal filed by the Centre for Environmental Rights. The notice argues that the appeal against the postponement of compliance timeframes for Minimum Emission Standards at the Vanderbijlpark facility was submitted late and is therefore invalid unless condonation is granted.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) has requested the Minister of Mineral Resources and Energy to suspend a decision granting Mineral Sands Resources (Pty) Ltd (MSR) an amendment to its mining rights for the expansion of the Tormin Mine on the West Coast of South Africa. The CER argues that the decision was made without public participation and poses an irreparable risk to Critical Biodiversity Areas.

The Centre for Environmental Rights, acting on behalf of the Vaal Environmental Justice Alliance (VEJA) and groundWork, has filed a formal appeal to the Minister of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries against a decision to partially grant ArcelorMittal SA Vanderbijlpark Steel Works (AMSA) a postponement of compliance time-frames for Minimum Emission Standards (MES) under the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act 39 of 2004.

A letter from groundWork Trust confirming the appointment of the Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) as its attorneys of record to appeal a decision regarding ArcelorMittal’s Vanderbijlpark facility.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) sent a letter to the Department of Mineral Resources and Energy (DMRE) on 2 September 2020, disputing the adequacy of the DMRE's response to a Promotion of Access to Information Act (PAIA) request. The CER asserts that the DMRE failed to provide critical supporting records, modelling data, and cost assumptions used to develop the Integrated Resource Plan for Electricity 2019 (IRP 2019).

The Life After Coal campaign, comprising the Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), groundWork (gW), and Earthlife Africa (ELA), submitted formal objections on 28 August 2020 against Eskom's applications for alternative emission limits at the Medupi and Matimba power stations. The campaign argues that these requests are an unlawful attempt to circumvent South Africa's Minimum Emission Standards (MES) and violate constitutional rights to a healthy environment.

The South African Water Caucus (SAWC) issued a series of letters between April and August 2020 to the South African government, including the Minister of Water and Sanitation and the President, demanding emergency water and sanitation services. The correspondence highlights a critical lack of access to clean water and soap in numerous rural and informal settlements, which the SAWC argues increases the risk of COVID-19 transmission and violates constitutional rights. The document includes detailed annexures listing specific communities in the Western Cape, Limpopo, Eastern Cape, Mpumalanga, KwaZulu-Natal, Gauteng, and Free State suffering from dry taps, unreliable water tankers, and inadequate sanitation.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) submits that the draft Upstream Petroleum Resources Development Bill, 2019 is deficient in its approach to the climate crisis and community welfare. The CER argues that gas exploration and production pose severe risks to climate, air, water, and marine environments, and that the Bill's consultation processes are 'woefully inadequate'. Furthermore, the CER criticizes the lack of a robust Social and Labour Plan (SLP) framework to ensure benefits reach affected communities, noting that a proposed 20% state carried interest is an insufficient substitute for local development. The submission also calls for stronger administrative penalties to ensure corporate compliance with environmental laws.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), acting as part of the Life After Coal campaign and other environmental justice networks, submitted written objections on July 30, 2020, against Eskom's application for a once-off suspension of compliance with New Plant Minimum Emission Standards (MES) and a variation request for the Grootvlei Power Station. The CER argues that the application is procedurally invalid, lacks a detailed decommissioning schedule, and unlawfully seeks to extend polluting activities beyond the station's end-of-life, thereby violating constitutional rights to a healthy environment.

The South African Water Caucus (SAWC) is demanding urgent government intervention to provide water and sanitation to over 200 communities across South Africa. The letter highlights systemic failures in water distribution, the inadequacy of the Department of Water and Sanitation's hotline, and the severe health risks posed to vulnerable populations during the COVID-19 pandemic. It provides a detailed annexure of affected areas in the Western Cape, Limpopo, Eastern Cape, Mpumalanga, KwaZulu-Natal, Gauteng, and Free State, citing issues such as dry taps, polluted water sources, and a lack of soap and sanitation products.

The Centre for Environmental Rights, on behalf of the Life After Coal campaign and 350Africa.org, provides commentary on the National Treasury's 2020 Draft Technical Paper 'Financing a Sustainable Economy'. The submission argues that the Draft Paper focuses too heavily on voluntary disclosure rather than binding commitments and fails to align with the urgency of the climate crisis or South Africa's international obligations under the Paris Agreement.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), acting for the Vaal Environmental Justice Alliance and groundWork, has issued a formal request to the National Air Quality Officer and other authorities for the reasons and supporting documentation behind a decision to partly grant an application by ArcelorMittal South Africa (Vanderbijlpark) (AMSA). The decision relates to the suspension, alternative limits, or postponement of compliance with Minimum Emission Standards (MES) under the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act, 2004.

The Public Health Association of South Africa (PHASA) calls for a 'healthy recovery' from COVID-19 that avoids returning to unsustainable economic patterns. The group argues that air pollution from coal-fired power stations, particularly in the Mpumalanga Highveld, exacerbates respiratory diseases and coronavirus mortality. PHASA advocates for a just energy transition to renewables, the closure of coal mines, and the active involvement of the health sector in the Presidential Climate Change Commission to address the intersecting crises of pandemics and climate change.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), acting as amicus curiae, argues that the KwaZulu-Natal High Court erred in ruling that Tendele Coal Mining (Pty) Ltd did not require a separate environmental authorisation under the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA) for its operations. The CER contends that an Environmental Management Programme (EMP) approved under the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act (MPRDA) is not equivalent to a NEMA authorisation. The CER further argues that the High Court's refusal of interdictory relief based on the existence of alternative remedies under section 28 of NEMA is a dangerous precedent that undermines judicial enforcement of environmental rights. Finally, the CER seeks the overturning of a costs order against the appellants, asserting it creates a chilling effect and ignores the protections for public interest litigants provided in section 32(2) of NEMA.

The Centre for Environmental Rights, representing groundWork and Earthlife Africa, has issued a final deadline of 25 June 2020 for the South African Department of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries to provide written reasons for doubling the 2020 sulphur dioxide (SO2) minimum emission standard (MES) limit for existing sub-category 1.1 solid-fuel combustion installations. The organization argues that this amendment weakens environmental protections and seeks the information to determine if High Court review proceedings are necessary.

A letter from the Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) to Tokiso Dispute Settlement (Pty) Ltd regarding the management of Multi-Stakeholder Reference Group (MSRG) and Implementation Task Team (ITT) meetings for air quality priority areas in South Africa.

The Life After Coal Campaign argues that the Draft Regulations Amending the Electricity Regulations on New Generation Capacity, 2011 are redundant and legally inconsistent. They contend that the Electricity Regulation Act (ERA) does not require Ministerial approval for municipalities to establish electricity capacity, and that such regulations create unnecessary barriers to the urgent transition to clean energy. The document highlights the severe health, environmental, and economic harms of South Africa's coal-dependent energy sector and criticizes the Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) 2019 for unjustifiably constraining renewable energy while permitting new coal and gas capacity. The campaign recommends that if the regulations proceed, they must include requirements for environmental and health impact assessments, transparent public consultation, and financial support for under-resourced municipalities.