Makoma Lekalakala and Francesca de Gasparis at a recent panel event.
16 August 2024: Today, less than a month after the Southern African Faith Communities Environment Institute (SAFCEI) and Earthlife Africa Johannesburg received news that their court case will be heard on the on 15-16 October, Minister Kgosientso Ramokgopa announced that he will be withdrawing the gazetted 2500MW nuclear s34 determination. SAFCEI and Earthlife Africa were seeking to review and set aside the Minister of Electricity’s controversial Section 34 determination as the organisations argue that the determination is unlawful and unconstitutional because the process has, thus far, been procedurally unfair.
SAFCEI’s Executive Director Francesca de Gasparis says, “SAFCEI welcomes the Minister of Energy’s announcement that he will withdraw the Gazette for 2500 MW of new nuclear energy. The Minister publicly agreeing with our substantive concerns, about the lack of public participation and transparency in the process for new nuclear energy procurement, is an important moment for democracy and government decision-making. We commend him for taking this stance.”
She says that as a faith-based environmental NGO, ethical and transparent decision-making must be done, by government, in ways that meet the needs of the people living in South Africa. “The Minister assured citizens of his commitment to public participation and transparency around this kind of decision-making and that it would be subjected to the ‘highest levels of public scrutiny’ – which was heartening, and we will hold him to that,” says de Gasparis.
In the media briefing today, the Minister said, “I agree with Earthlife Africa. I agree with the Southern African Faith Communities’ Environment Institute (SAFCEI) – Nersa should have subjected that process to a public participation process. The last thing we want is to do a major build programme and on the back of suspicion that the department and government is hiding something from the public. So, I had said we are going to democratise this process. We are going to make it transparent. There is nothing to hide, and on the basis of that, I have directed that it is important that we accede to that request, essentially saying to counsel we agree on what Earthlife Africa [and SAFCEI] are saying, that this process must be subjected to an additional public participation process.”
And the organisations agree that it was refreshing to hear a Minister of Energy acknowledge the government’s responsibility of “ensuring that this process is subjected to the highest levels of public scrutiny, including our response in relation to the suspensive conditions.” They say that the Minister’s sentiment is what they have been fighting for, all along, that “the procurement process must be able to stand the test of time and be able to subject itself to scrutiny…”. This is why they brought the case against Nersa, in the first place.
At a recent panel discussion with communities in Cape Town, Francesca de Gasparis and Makoma Lekalakala informed citizens about the dangers of nuclear energy and garnered widespread support for their application, filed at the High Court, to stop government’s recent nuclear energy procurement plans.
According to Earthlife Africa Johannesburg Director, Makoma Lekalakala, “We appreciate that the Minister had considered our arguments against the incomplete public participation on the fulfilment of suspensive conditions, as that had to go through comments by the public. And it is only when the Integrated Energy Plan 2023 (IRP2023) is gazetted that we can think of what the energy mix should look like. We must consider the different sources. We must understand which of these come in at the least cost – to the economy, to people and the environment – because in our extensive work with communities, it is clear that they need a lot more information, before they can make meaningful contributions to these types of decisions. Moreover, when we give them the facts about nuclear power and its potential to cause harm, they do not want it.”
“Now, we hope to see this kind of commitment to transparency and public inclusion replicated in all major decisions, especially when it comes to the just transition and inclusive energy planning for all,” said Lekalakala.
“We are of the view that the cost and length of procurement of nuclear energy would be prohibitive for South Africa. It will not address our energy needs and – for all the harm it has and still could cause, which is often not talked about – should be left in the 20th century. The future of energy for Africa is renewables. Fossil fuels and nuclear cannot compete with it, in terms of cost to the consumer, speed of installation and impact on the environment. We are confident that if there is an inclusive and fully transparent process, there will be no need for new nuclear energy for South Africa in the future,” concludes de Gasparis.
Background:
Earthlife Africa and SAFCEI won a tense legal battle in 2017, where government was exposed for trying to progress an unlawful and unconstitutional nuclear deal that could have bankrupted the country. This is the main reason these environmental justice watchdogs are so vigilant, especially when it comes to such extremely costly energy projects. These plants often take decades to plan and construct, before becoming operational. Then there is the long-term intergenerational economic burden of costs related to operation, maintenance, and nuclear waste management, as well as decommissioning costs.
Read our blog post: Five Reasons to Promote Renewables and Reject Nuclear Energy
To stay informed about our work, follow Earthlife Africa Johannesburg on Facebook and Twitter.