Protestors and performing artists gathered at Surfers Corner in Muizenberg to protest against seismic exploration by Shell in this December 2021 file picture. The legal challenge over government approvals of such surveys goes to court in June.
Image: Armand Hough
The legal challenge concerning offshore seismic surveys along South Africa's West Coast and Northern Cape coastline has reached a critical juncture, as key parties in the case have submitted their Heads of Argument and joint practice note in the Western Cape High Court. The case pits Aukotowa Fisheries Primary Co-operative, The Green Connection, and Natural Justice (the Applicants) against the government and TGS Geophysical Company UK Ltd (the Respondents), with hearings set for next month.
Neville van Rooy, Outreach Ambassador for The Green Connection, said the crux of the matter is not a moral question on the merits of oil and gas, but whether government officials considered all pertinent information before granting authorisation for the seismic surveys. "Our case is that they did not," he said. Van Rooy said the evidence presented aims to prove that significant concerns, primarily the potential impact on small-scale fishing communities and their livelihoods, were inadequately assessed. The cumulative effects of prolonged seismic blasting and the troubling reach of underwater noise are issues that experts argue were overlooked in environmental reports relied upon by decision-makers.
The TGS survey proposes to use seismic blasting with powerful airguns that emit intense sound pulses at regular intervals over extended periods, effectively mapping the seabed for prospective oil and gas deposits. Van Rooy warns that “small-scale fishers and coastal communities depend on access to a healthy ocean for food, income, and survival.” He points to how the exclusion zones surrounding the survey vessels may block these fishers from traditional fishing grounds for protracted durations, jeopardising their livelihoods and food security.
Walter Steenkamp, representing Aukotowa Fisheries Primary Co-operative in Port Nolloth, Northern Cape, echoed similar sentiments. He said the essence of the case is about accountability: ensuring government decisions, which entail long-lasting consequences, are based on a thorough consideration of all relevant facts.
The legal challenge emerges in the aftermath of a previous successful litigation against Searcher Geodata’s proposed West Coast seismic survey, where the High Court identified critical flaws in the decision-making and consultation process. The court acknowledged the threats posed to small-scale fishing communities and marine ecosystems, highlighting that essential environmental and social impacts were not sufficiently evaluated prior to project approval — a concern mirrored in the ongoing TGS case.
Van Rooy elaborates, “Government decisions affecting the public must be legally sound and properly informed. We are contesting this decision because key issues were not robustly examined before approval was granted. This includes whether the project would noticeably enhance energy security and if the long-term economic and climate implications were properly understood.”
The Applicants also argue that the government has neglected its obligation to protect the coastline as a shared public resource meant for all South Africans, rather than catering primarily to private industrial interests. They challenge the adequacy of climate considerations in the decision, particularly the conflict between new fossil fuel exploration and South Africa’s carbon reduction targets.
Steenkamp said, "These are not minor issues. South Africans are currently facing the repercussions of climate change through drought, flooding, and extreme heat while simultaneously requiring energy solutions that are feasible and capable of meeting demand." He said the government must ensure that any extensive projects receive rigorous scrutiny before irreversible actions are taken.
The matter is slated for hearings at the Western Cape High Court on June 1 and 2.
IOS