The legal battle over an end to load shedding continues as the government and Eskom are seeking leave to appeal a landmark judgment which sought to compel it to exempt certain institutions from rolling blackouts.
The legal battle over an end to load shedding continues as the government and Eskom are seeking leave to appeal a landmark judgment which sought to compel it to exempt certain institutions from rolling blackouts.
ActionSA lawyers vigorously opposed their application on Wednesday.
This as Eskom in its arguments maintains it is “impossible to isolate particular categories of customers for immediate ‘exemption’ from load shedding”.
The landmark ruling delivered by a full bench of the Gauteng High Court, Pretoria, in December last year ordered Eskom along with Electricity Minister Kgosientsho Ramokgopa to take reasonable steps to exempt all public health institutions, including hospitals and clinics, public schools and police stations, including satellite stations, from the impacts of load shedding by the end of January.
Arguments for the application for leave to appeal were heard in the Gauteng High Court, Pretoria, on Wednesday.
“In the case of entities that this court’s order requires to be exempted, excluding them from the grid would entail excluding the communities in which they are embedded. This means that, if Eskom were to exclude from load shedding all the entities listed in paragraph 3 of the order, it will not implement load shedding at all.
Supplying all those entities, together with the customers that would have to also be supplied because of embeddedness, would use at least all of Eskom’s capacity at any given moment,” Eskom argued in court papers.
Eskom further said to the extent that the order required that alternative sources of supply were provided to the listed entities by January 31, 2024 (or in the months thereafter), too was practically impossible citing, “the complexity, immense cost, and lengthy timelines for the procuring of alternative sources of energy for all the listed entities”.
“Alternative sources of supply could only be rolled out over the course of a number of years.
It is thus simply impossible to provide alternative sources of supply by 31 January 2024 or shortly thereafter. Without an allocation of additional funding from Treasury, the order is impossible to implement.
The relief ordered ... is constitutionally problematic. It imposes legal obligations on the Minister and possibly Eskom, which are inconsistent with the law and practically impossible to implement,” Eskom contended.
Meanwhile ActionSA argued that government and state officials cited in the case “lack the political will or any humanitarian concern for the citizens of this country, to accept responsibility to remedy this absolute travesty that has ensued in our country”.
“The application for leave to appeal is simply a further example of the continued stance adopted by the various respondents of absolving themselves of the realities and their assertions of alleged ‘independence’, and due fulfilment of their executive duties in accordance with the Constitution, as well as the relevant empowering legislation, together with the stance adopted by (Eskom) by laying the blame squarely at the foot of the (president) and (government).
“The affidavits filed by the respondents collectively attempt to further dilute the humanitarian crisis that exists and failed to address the simple fact that citizens’ fundamental rights are being infringed upon.
“From ActionSA’s point of view, this has always been a humanitarian issue and not a political one. Its focus and ultimate concern has always been for the provision of electricity to public hospitals and schools, where children, the elderly and the sick, are the most vulnerable to the effects of load shedding.”
The DA asked what Eskom had to hide in relation to its decision to appeal a ruling by the Gauteng High Court delivered last week, in which the court ordered the entity to hand over to AfriForum information on existing coal and diesel contracts, and contracts for power exports to neighbouring countries.
Eskom said it would respond on its decision to appeal both matters in due time.
Cape Times