Nkosikhulule Nyembezi
CAPE TOWN - The ANC government’s insatiable appetite for oil and gas may not last.
Persistent attempts by Mineral Resources and Energy Minister Gwede Mantashe to win a quick victory on the cheap call for South Africa to ensure the security of its energy supply through gas, nuclear and coal resources continue to face major resistance as the country transitions to low-carbon emissions.
But his nauseating luring of foreign investors and exhortation for unity by African states on the hydrocarbon front are moving up.
And despite the incredible heroism of the majority of people opposing the threat to the environment in communities earmarked for mining, it’s still more likely than not that the exploration and exploitation of fossil fuels flags will eventually be planted amid the rubble of the Wild and West Coast as the Eastern Cape High Court (Gqeberha) and the Western Cape High Court hear in the coming weeks the main arguments on the licence applications for the undertaking of oil and gas exploration activities along the two coastlines.
But even if that happens, the ANC government will be left weaker and poorer than it was before the repeated granting of mining licences for the fracking of our oceans. Environmental degradation doesn’t pay.
Why not? If you go back in history, there are plenty of examples in our country of capitalist powers that enriched and continue to enrich themselves through environmentally destructive and extractive mining industries.
Mantashe, a former coal miner and union leader, recently told chief executive officers of mining companies that their product shouldn’t be abandoned “prematurely”.
But modern South Africa is different — whereby “modern,” I mean at least the past 28 years of our constitutional democracy.
The Constitution entitles everyone to a healthy environment, and also the right to have the environment protected from pollution and ecological degradation through laws that promote conservation and secure ecologically sustainable development.
This provision was widely misinterpreted as saying that it can only be enjoyed as long as it does not upset the country’s reliance on fossil fuels to produce more than 80% of its electricity; a proposition proved horribly wrong by the important court decisions supporting community struggles to halt several oil companies from mining along the coast of South Africa.
On March 1, the Western Cape High Court affirmed that an interdict of a seismic survey by Australian geoscience data company Searcher off the West Coast will remain in place pending the outcomes of a legal challenge to the reconnaissance permit granted for the survey in May 2021, and due to expire in November.
In its court papers, Searcher said that an interim interdict would lead to a loss of R405 million, and further loss of investment to the SA economy.
But West Coast communities argued that their constitutional rights outweigh Searcher's commercial interests.
Also, the Wild Coast communities successfully argued the same, and on December 28 were granted an interdict in a milestone victory to force Shell to walk away from the entire operation, including the possibility of extracting any oil and gas which might have been found during the controversial seismic survey.
And they are surely right about that. We’re all thankful that courts have consistently vindicated human rights by reminding the ANC government that the State, in its capacity as the public trustee of all coastal public property, must ensure that coastal public property is used, managed, protected, conserved and enhanced in the interests of the whole community.
They have also applied brakes to a gravy train meant to increase the coffers of powerful politicians who happen to be public representatives.
Why and when did further promotion of reliance on fossil fuels become unsustainable?
The answer lies partly in President Cyril Ramaphosa’s November 1 announcement of an international partnership to support South Africa’s just transition to a low-carbon economy and a climate-resilient society.
At the heart of this partnership is the implementation of a just transition “in a manner that promotes and sustains employment, livelihoods and economic inclusion for historically marginalised communities and sectors of our society”.
It’s hard to make progress while continuing to promote regressive policies aimed at pouring further resources into fossil fuels that threaten the environment, health and well-being of South Africans.
We can see that dynamic happening to us as we speak when Mantashe criticises the companies’ CEOs for not being more vocal in the campaign to support coal mining and technologies that may prolong the use of fossil fuel.
I’d add two more known factors that explain why our courts should continue affirming the community's struggles to oppose fossil fuel mining in support of a national consensus to switch to renewable energy sources.
First, our just transition is underpinned by constitutional values that emphasise procedural justice by focusing on facilitating an inclusive and fair process.
Conversely, the current push by some in government for prolonged use of fossil fuels through granting of mining licences does not acknowledge vulnerable and marginalised groups through their inclusion in decision-making processes at various levels.
It blatantly and opportunistically excludes them in favour of the political interests of the elite.
The government’s top-down decision-making processes, which are supposed to be biased towards fostering a complementary bottom-up dynamic, do not enable and empower all stakeholders to take part meaningfully, through enhancing capability and capacity to participate.
This is intentional and must be resisted on all fronts.
Second, it is also underpinned by distributive justice, which focuses on the need to address a “double inequality” faced by local communities caused by the negative environmental costs of mining.
These include pollution and disturbances in the ecosystems that sustain the livelihoods of communities.
Furthermore the impacts of mining and the mining outputs should benefit those communities situated in these activities’ vicinity, and in what ways they do should be spelled out.
Only a handful of local community members have employment prospects due to a lack of skills in a variety of operational areas.
As such, even if Searcher and Shell-contracted Shearwater GeoServices eventually get a go-ahead to mine, the Wild and West Coast communities will find themselves unemployed, without agricultural and marine resources to rely on, and spending years fighting to hold down environmentally hostile economic activities.
So continued reliance on fossil fuels is a losing proposition, as the communities will argue in courts.
This has been true; it has been obvious to anyone willing to look at the facts.
Unfortunately, there are still enthusiasts and fanatics in this government who refuse to believe this — and some of them control executive, licensing and regulatory powers.
Nyembezi is a policy analyst and human rights activist
Cape Times