The Application of International Law in Terms of Earthlife Africa Johannesburg and Another v Minister of Energy and Others 65662/16 (2017) Case

Authors: M. van der Bank

Abstract:

This study involves a legal analysis of the case Earthlife Africa Johannesburg v Minister of Environmental Affairs and Others. The case considered the impact of the Thabametsi Power Project if it operated to the expected year 2060 on the global climate and ever-changing climate, in South Africa. This judgment highlights the significance, place and principles of climate change and where climate change impacts the South African environmental law which has its founding principles in the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996. This paper seeks to examine the advances for climate change regulation and application in terms of international law, in South Africa, through a qualitative study involving comparative national and international case law. A literature review study was conducted to compare and contrast the various aspects of law in order to support the argument undertaken. The paper presents a detailed discussion of the current legislation and the position as it currently stands with reference to international law and interpretation. The relevant protections as outlined in the National Environmental Management Act will be discussed. It then proceeds to outline the potential liability of the Minister in the interpretation and application of international law.

Keywords: Climate change, environment, environmental review, international law, principles.

Digital Object Identifier (DOI): doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3566381

References:

[1] I. Currie, and J. De Waal, 2005. The Bill of Rights Handbook. Juta Cape Town.
[2] Earthlife Africa - Johannesburg v The Minister of Environmental Affairs and 4 Others High Court Gauteng Division Pretoria 65662/16.
[3] European Council, 2018. International agreements on climate action. https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/climate-change/international-agreements-climate-action/ Accessed on (date of use 16 April 2019).
[4] Gore, S. and Pienaar, A. 2017. From Paris to Pretoria: High Court adjudicates on Climate change for the first time. https://www.cliffedekkerhofmeyr.com/en/news/publications/2017/environmental/environmental-alert-22-march-from-paris-to-pretoria-high-court-adjudicates-on-climate-change-for-the-first-time.htmlAccessed on (date of use 15 April 2019).
[5] Greenwood, C. 2008. Sources of International Law: An Introduction.http://legal.un.org/avl/pdf/ls/greenwood_outline.pdfAccessed on (date of use 27 April 2019).
[6] International Law Commission, 2016. Report on the work of the sixty-eighth session (2016). http://legal.un.org/ilc/reports/2016/. Accessed on (date of use 20 April 2019).
[7] The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996.
[8] Statue of the International Court of Justice.
[9] National Environmental Management Act 107 of 1998.
[10] National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act 39 of 2004.
[11] North Sea Continental Shelf 1969.
[12] Tladi, D 2016. Interpretation and international law in South Africa courts: The Supreme Court of Appeal and the Al Bashir saga. African Human Rights Law Journal Volume 16 No 2 of 2016 310-338.
[13] United Nations, 2019. What is the Paris Agreement? https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/what-is-the-paris-agreementAccessed on (date of use 28 April 2019).
[14] United Nations, 2019. South Africa’s Intended National Determined Contribution (INDC).https://www4.unfccc.int/sites/ndcstaging/PublishedDocuments/South%20Africa%20First/South%20Africa.pdf Accessed on (date of use 28 April 2019).
[15] Ventura, M.J. 2015. Escape from Johannesburg? Sudanese President Al-Bashir visits South Africa, and the Implicit Removal of Head of State Immunity by the UN Security Council of Al-Jedda. In the Journal of International Criminal Justice. Volume 13, Issue 5 995-1025.
[16] Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969.