An environmental and social rights conglomerate has refused to remove statements expressing their displeasure after the protected status of a strategic water source in Mpumalanga was revoked, potentially paving the way for a new coal mine.
The Coalition received a cease and desist notice last week for what a mining community organisation called “false, vicious, derogatory, anti-community and anti-development statements” on their website.
The Coalition is represented by the Centre for Environmental Rights and consists of the Mining and Environmental Justice Communities Network of SA, groundWork, Earthlife Africa Johannesburg, BirdLife SA, the Endangered Wildlife Trust, the Federation for a Sustainable Environment, the Association for Water and Rural Development (Award) and the Bench Marks Foundation,
Since 2015 the group has worked to defend the Mabola Protected Environment, home to a strategic water source which provides fresh drinking water to 50% of the country, including Johannesburg and Tshwane as well as various towns and agricultural regions in Mpumalanga, KwaZulu-Natal and the Free State.
But parts of the area are no longer considered protected after Mpumalanga MEC for agriculture, rural development, land and environmental affairs Vusumuzi Shongwe revoked the protected area status on December 8.
The Yzermyn underground coal mine, close to the town of Wakkerstroom, was proposed by Indian mining group Atha-Africa Ventures, now known as Uthaka Energy. A 10% shareholder is the Bashubile Trust whose trustees include Vincent Gezinhliziyo Zuma and Sizwe Christopher Zuma.
The mining application date was November 4, 2013.
The area was first declared protected in January 2014, by the then Mpumalanga MEC for economic development, environment and tourism, Yvonne Phosa, in terms of the Protected Areas Act.
Mabola consists of mountain grasslands, forests and wetlands and many of the villagers who live there are subsistence farmers who make money off the land.
Phosa said the purpose of the declaration of the Mabola Protected Area was to enable the landowners to take collective action to conserve the biodiversity on their land and to seek legal recognition in terms of the Protected Areas Act. It was also to protect the area if it was sensitive to development due to its biological diversity, natural characteristics, scenic and landscape value, and the provision of environmental goods and services and to protect a specific ecosystem and ensure that the use of natural resources in the area was sustainable.
In 2016 then ministers of mineral resources Mosebenzi Zwane and environmental affairs Edna Molewa permitted the mining proposal. The permit was challenged by the Coalition and in 2018 the Pretoria high court set it aside. This decision was upheld by the Constitutional Court in 2019.
The Yzermyn coal mine could not go ahead on the basis that the area was environmentally protected.
Now this may change after the protected area status was revoked.
Shongwe said the purpose of the proposed exclusion of parts of the area as environmentally protected was to ensure a balance between the use of natural resources for socio-economic benefits for the community of Pixley Ka Seme local municipality and the country, while promoting environmental protection and sustainability. It was also to ensure or promote economic growth of the country and the community of the area and the coexistence of mining activities and conservation in the area.
In response to the about-turn, the Centre for Environmental Rights said: “It is evident from the following that the underlying purpose of the proposed exclusion is to facilitate the development of Atha-Africa Ventures (Pty) Ltd’s [aka Uthaka Energy] proposed Yzermyn underground coal mine.
“The properties proposed to be excluded are precisely the properties in respect of which Atha sought [and unlawfully obtained] permission to mine in the [Mabola Protected Environment] from the ministers of environmental affairs and mineral resources in terms of section 48(1)(b) of the Protected Areas Act.
“ MEC Shongwe’s third stated purpose for the proposed exclusion ... is to ‘promote coexistence of mining activities and conservation within the area on the properties ... This could only mean the proposed Yzermyn mine.”
Voice Community Representative Council (The Voice), an organisation representing some of the mining affected community members of Dr Pixley Ka Isaka local municipality sent a “cease and desist” notice to the Coalition partners on February 17.
“They have been publishing false, vicious, derogatory, anti-community and anti-development statements on their website positing as news.”
Thabiso Nene, chairperson of The Voice, said: “Our local community has had enough of the false propaganda of CER and its unholy alliance. Enough is enough.
“CER thinks it can publish rubbish on their website and the historically disadvantaged local mining-affected community would do nothing. We have changed that perception today.”
He said the protected status of certain farms were fraudulently included in the Mabola Protected Environment.
“A detailed scientific study of the area ... demonstrated that these areas, being historically transformed with mining activities, did not deserve to be protected.
“The frustration of our local community, held hostage to certain environmental NGO’s for the past six years, was just looking forward with some hope to fulfil their developmental aspirations after the partial deproclamation of the Mabola Protected Environment. The CER’s subsequent takedown of our community by publishing false and fake media statements on their website is an insult our community is not willing to forgive.
“The Voice has also launched intervention applications in various high courts against these NGO’s to pave way for the development of our area. We will not let these NGO’s get away [with] spreading the canard that they seek environmental and social justice for the local community. We can speak for ourselves and we would expose the nefarious nature of the litigations being conducted by these NGO’s.
“This subversion of SA economic interests is unacceptable and unforgivable, especially during this time of pandemic which has affected our community to despair. We seek to have our voices heard against this subversion of national interest which is costing our impoverished communities tens of thousands of jobs and developmental opportunities.”
The Centre for Environmental Rights said their attorneys advised The Voice that there was no basis in law for their demand, or for their threatened litigation, “and that it in fact infringes upon our clients’ constitutional rights. Those rights include the right to freedom of speech protected by the Bill of Rights — the same protection that also applies to The Voice”.
They quoted the recent high court judgment in the case of MSR v Reddell and others in which Western Cape Deputy Judge President Goliath held that:
“[64] Individuals or NGO’s must have the freedom to respond to issues affecting society, such as those related to the environment and sustainable development. In instances where corporates could be the main cause of damaging and destructive behaviour of the environment and biodiversity, civil society should be allowed to confront and restrain such behaviour. Litigation of this nature pose a serious threat to the defendants’ participation in matters of public importance, particularly environmental issues. Public dialogue and debate with broad participation on matters of public interests, such as the environment must be protected and encouraged. Any legal action aimed at stifling public discourse and impairing public debates should be discouraged.”
According to the Coalition's community campaigner, Thomas Mnguni, the long-standing campaign to prevent this new coal mine inside a strategic water source area was not about being anti-development.
“It is about a different kind of development that is climate resilient, healthy and sustainable — instead of another coal mine that would destroy people’s health, land and access to water, and benefit only a few. In line with national and provincial policies, the Dr Pixley Ka iSaka Seme municipality has listed the area as a priority conservation site, and confirmed that this ecosystem must be protected. The people of Mpumalanga deserve a development path that is inclusive, and sustainable.”
An e-mail to Uthaka Energy director Morgam Munsamy was answered by “Admin Manager”.
“There has been much written in the media and the NGO platforms over the last few years.
“Perhaps you have been misled by the deliberate misinformation campaign by the Centre for Environmental Rights in its statement released on their website and possibly to other media platforms that Uthaka Energy [formerly known as Atha-Africa Ventures] had anything to do with Mpumalanga MEC Vusi Shongwe's decision to revoke the protected environment status for a large part of the Mabola Protected Environment.
“Uthaka Energy has been a willing participant as an interested and affected party, just like the Centre for Environmental Rights who were also an interested and affected party, during the public participation process for the de-proclamation.
“All other relevant and factual information pertaining to the company operations and processes would be released in future media statements as and when necessary.”
TimesLIVE
