South Africans win court case against Govt., oil company to stop offshore drilling

Sep 04, 2022 News

---

…say local communities weren’t properly consulted

Kaieteur New – In a case of what some would describe as ‘sheer people power’, South African villagers, fishermen, environmentalists, and other concerned persons were last Thursday able to get a court to issue an order preventing its Government and oil giant, Shell, from conducting oil exploration activities along one of the nation’s pristine coastline, insisting that they were not properly consulted on the development and impacts of the project. The win is being seen as a monumental one for stakeholders who continued to express concerns about the impacts of exploration on marine life.

A New York Times report of the nation’s largest city, Johannesburg, said that the case was one that “pitted rural South African communities against the energy giant Shell Global…” In revoking the company’s rights to explore the seabed of South Africa’s Wild Coast, “a panel of three judges sided with rural communities, fishermen, traditional healers, and environmental activists against the company and South Africa’s Government,” the report said.

The ruling was in South Africa’s Eastern Cape Province and sets aside the exploration rights that South Africa’s Department of Mineral Resources and Energy granted to Shell and a local partner, Impact Africa, in 2014, as well as the Government’s decision to renew those rights over the objections of people living on the coastline.

It was noted that while the recent ruling could be appealed, “…it is uncertain whether Shell or the Government will be enthusiastic about a fight. Shell has said it is reviewing the court decision, but in the past it has retreated from projects when public opposition and regulatory hurdles made financial and political costs prohibitively high.” And even if Shell should walk away, analysts say, the court ruling does not preclude another company from gaining the prospecting rights.

The ruling nevertheless represented a rare victory for environmental interests in a country that imports most of its oil and has long favoured development over the environment, it was explained. South Africa’s Wild Coast is an unspoiled string of beaches, where forests roll down into the crystalline waters of the Indian Ocean. While fishing and farming villages dot the coastline, the area is also a popular tourist destination, a place where cows are known to share the beaches with sunbathers and swimmers.

Local residents were therefore alarmed last year when Shell announced plans to conduct a seismic survey, using sound waves to search for the deposits of oil and gas its geologists suspected lay hidden beneath the Indian Ocean seabed. They got together and, with the aid of environmental lawyers and activists, filed suit, saying the Government had not properly taken into account the concerns of the community before granting the exploration rights.

The judicial panel concurred, saying the process also failed to properly notify the people living along the coast. Communities said they first heard of Shell’s plans 30 days before the seismic activity was set to begin. A notice in English and Afrikaans language newspapers did not reach remote villages, where in any case, isiXhosa is the main language.

The report said that, “The heart of the case was about whether they have a right to be consulted or not,” said Johan Lorenzen, one of the attorneys who represented the community. “It’s not inherently an anti-oil and gas judgment.” Since the ruling applies only to the process followed by Shell, Lorenzen said, another energy company could purchase the exploration rights and begin prospecting, if it were to follow the correct procedures in consulting the community. Importantly, “by positioning the communities as custodians of the environment, the ruling could set a precedent for objections to the nearly 150 oil and gas surveys around Africa’s coastline, said Thandile Chinyavanhu, an activist with Greenpeace Africa. A fisherman, who joined the case as a plaintiff, Nontsindiso Nongcavu, also agreed that the judgment gives communities a needed weapon to fight for their land. “Our Government leaves us nowhere,” said the 42-year-old, who supports a multi-generational family trapping rock lobster.

In December, Greenpeace was among several groups that tried to stop the seismic survey on the basis that it was a threat to marine and coastal life, but a judge ruled that Shell’s mitigation measures would be enough to minimise the harm.

South Africa is the largest consumer of oil and petroleum products in Africa, but has limited oil reserves and is highly dependent on oil imports, particularly from the Middle East. Nearly all of its proven reserves are offshore.

In the grip of an energy crisis, South Africa’s Government has embraced fossil fuel development as a solution, despite its stated commitment to green energy. The Minister of Mineral Resources and Energy, Gwede Mantashe, a powerful voice in the governing African National Congress, has vociferously defended South Africa’s exploration for fossil fuels. Last year, he described environmental groups as “apartheid and colonialism of a special kind, masquerading as a great interest for environmental protection.” The report said that South Africa’s Ministry of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment, has historically played a much more muted role, including a slow response to sanctioning the national power supplier, Eskom, for its polluting coal-fired power stations.

It was said that the recent court decision comes at a time when Shell is beginning a retreat from oil, as it attempts to pivot to cleaner energy. It has set a goal of net-zero emissions by 2050, and set a target of reducing oil output by 2 percent a year by 2030 through divestments and lower investments in exploration and production. When Shell originally received exploration rights to start seismic operations in 2014, it came at a time when the company was looking to expand production. Since then, a decision by a Dutch court in May 2021 ordered the company to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 45 percent by 2030 compared to 2019 levels, and the company has filed an appeal.

Last week stakeholders also protested expressing concerns over the impact of the sector after fishers and environmental activists in Cape Town forced their Government to meet and provide information regarding the vulnerability of their communities and the fishing industry. They held protest banners saying “we cannot eat oil and gas” and “oil and water do not mix.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

---

---