Africa Climate Alliance et. al., v. Minister of Mineral Resources & Energy et. al. (#CancelCoal case)

The Cancel Coal case was initiated in November 2021 by the African Climate Alliance (a youth-led organization), Vukani Environmental Justice Movement in Action, and Groundwork Trust, represented by the Centre for Environmental Rights. These groups filed proceedings in the High Court of South Africa to challenge the government’s decision to include 1,500 MW of new coal-fired power in the Integrated Resource Plan of 2019. The applicants named the Minister of Mineral Resources and Energy, the National Energy Regulator of South Africa (NERSA), the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment, and the President as respondents. The applicants argued that the government’s decision violated multiple constitutional rights, including the right to a healthy environment (section 24), the best interests of children (section 28), and the rights to life, dignity, and equality. They contended that coal-fired power, a major contributor to climate change and environmental degradation, posed severe risks to public health, particularly for children and future generations. Expert evidence was presented to demonstrate the harmful effects of coal emissions on health, livelihoods, and food security, as well as the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of cleaner, renewable energy alternatives. The applicants also criticized the decision-making process for failing to: (i) conduct specific impact assessments on children’s rights, (ii) consider cleaner coal technologies or renewable energy options, and (iii) ensure public participation, particularly from youth and vulnerable communities. An interlocutory application was filed in 2022 to compel the government to provide complete records of the decision, which the court granted on December 9, 2022. The Minister of Electricity was added as a fifth respondent on April 17, 2024. In a judgment handed down on December 4, 2024, Judge Cornelius van der Westhuizen ruled that the government’s plan to procure 1,500 MW of new coal-fired power was unconstitutional, unlawful, and invalid. The court found that the government had failed to meet its constitutional and statutory obligations by: (i) omitting any assessment of the decision’s impact on children’s health and well-being, (ii) failing to evaluate the feasibility of high-efficiency, low-emission coal technologies, and (iii) neglecting its obligation to ensure transparent and participatory decision-making processes. The court noted that the government’s Rule 53 record provided no evidence of adequate consideration of the environmental and health impacts of coal power, particularly on children. The respondents’ argument that South Africa’s energy crisis justified the procurement of coal-fired power was dismissed, as the court found no evidence supporting the necessity of coal over renewable alternatives. The judgment ordered the Minister of Mineral Resources and Energy and NERSA to pay the applicants’ legal costs, including the costs of two counsel.