Nineteen interest groups have filed a lawsuit to force the State to alleviate the crisis of load shedding and declare it in violation of the Constitution for not guaranteeing the sustained supply of electricity.
The application to the Pretoria High Court consists of two parts.
The parties are seeking urgent relief in the form of exempting certain sectors from the ongoing burden reduction to ensure “at least the continued functionality of basic services,” including healthcare, education, water and sanitation.
This means, they said, that the government must be interdicted to guarantee that public schools and hospitals, police stations, water plants and all the infrastructure necessary to support cell phone and internet services have a constant supply of electricity.
In Part A, the parties also request that the court order the government to submit a plan, within seven days, to explain the steps it would take to ensure that uninterrupted power is restored, including necessary maintenance of power plants. Eskom to achieve it. and requiring the utility to give consumers fair warning of pending outages.
In Part B, they seek a declaratory order that President Cyril Ramaphosa, Eskom, Minister for Public Enterprises Pravin Gordhan, Minister for Mineral Resources and Energy Gwede Mantashe, and the state as a whole have contravened their obligation to protect , respect and promote the rights enshrined in the Bill of Rights.
Mantashe must also be declared in breach of the constitutional duty imposed by article 34 of the Electric Power Regulation Law for failing to ensure adequate generation capacity.
Access to electricity is vital for the enjoyment of 10 fundamental rights, from the right to life to the right to access food, the parties said, and the failure of the state and the electricity company to guarantee a sustained supply has violated each of these.
“You just don’t know when load shedding will finally end. As such, its devastating consequences and the growing humanitarian crisis will only worsen.”
This was confirmed by Eskom’s announcement on Sunday that load shedding, in various stages, will be a permanent occurrence for the next two years, they added.
As part of the urgent relief requested in the first part of the request, the parties request that Eskom, Gordhan and Mantashe be given seven days to submit the record of all decisions made regarding sustainable energy supply, in addition to all agreements entered into with independent power producers and the dates on which they would see additional capacity added to the grid.
Ramaphosa must be intercepted, the applicants added, to give them copies of the government’s plan to alleviate the effect of the electricity crisis on health, education and employment within seven days, along with the government’s plan to effect a just transition from coal to coal. renewable energy.
It should also provide them with the agreements that the government has signed with other countries in this regard and make clear the financial implications of these.
Eskom should be required to submit a report within 10 days of the court ruling setting out its plans to restore power supply reliably, the parties requested, and update this report every 15 days until the dispute is resolved. energy crisis.
The challenge is presented by opposition parties, unions, non-profit organizations and a handful of individuals.
They include the United Democratic Movement (UDM), Build One South Africa, the Inkatha Freedom Party, the South African National Union of Metalworkers, the African Council of Street Vendors and Informal Businesses, the Soweto Action Committee, the Mustard, a nonprofit organization that provides lessons and extra meals to poor students, White River Neighborhood Watch, and political analyst Lukhona Mnguni.
In a founding affidavit, UDM leader Bantu Holomisa argued that it was eminently possible to “ensure the lights stay on to ensure at least the continued functionality of core services” but that Eskom has chosen not to take this approach.
“Your electricity rationing that arises from load reduction is a blunt instrument that hits everyone: young and old, sick and healthy, rich and poor alike. But this is not what our constitution contemplates. Even in a moment of crisis, the Bill of Rights continues to bind the state,” he said.
“It is necessary that the needs of the most vulnerable in society be addressed and the precautionary remedy is designed with that object in mind.”
In this part of the application, the parties also request the court to compel Gordhan and Mantashe to comply with the provisions of the Electricity Regulation Act and to disclose their plans to resolve the energy crisis.
The founding affidavit dwells on the confusion regarding the cause of the loadslide and the state’s plans to stop it.
“This application is also needed because of the disparate and in some cases contradictory reasons provided by different state departments to explain the catastrophe that is the cargo shedding.”
These divergences meant that the public “was kept in the dark about how the management of the network has reached a state of near collapse without consequence or liability,” the parties said.
What was clear, they added, was that Eskom has been badly managed to the point where it cannot perform its core function. But the confusion about how this came to be, itself violated the Constitution in that it prescribes that government must be accountable, transparent, and put citizens first.
“The public does not know the precise reasons why there is a shedding. The reasons given by the government have changed over time.”
Holomisa argued that the threat posed by the detachment of loads to the survival of hospital patients made the request urgent.
This urgency was supported by the fact that Eskom imposed load reduction indiscriminately and that Health Minister Joe Phaahla admitted that the backup facilities in the 72 public hospitals that they are meant to exempt from planned outages would not be able to provide backup power for extended periods. periods.
Therefore, there is no guarantee that they will benefit from the uninterrupted supply of electricity on which, in particular, the proper treatment of sick babies depends.
“There is no greater reason for urgency than the protection of life. Substantial reparation cannot be obtained in the ordinary cause, since with each passing week more lives will be lost,” said Holomisa. “The sooner interim relief is granted and implemented, the more lives can be saved.”
Food safety is also grounds for urgent relief, the affidavit added, so that the court can compel the state to at least explain how cargo shedding will be managed in a way that prevents devastation to the agricultural sector and the environment. . country’s food supply.
The parties request that their application be heard on or shortly after February 28 and that the defendants, which include the National Energy Regulator of South Africa (Nersa), submit affidavits in response by February 13, if they intend to oppose. to the request.
In part B of their court offer, they are asking for Nersa’s decision to allow Eskom to impose rate increases to recover R318 billion in the next fiscal year and R352 billion in the next fiscal year to be reviewed and annulled.
Ramaphosa said on Sunday that he had called for the rate increases to be suspended.
