| Share facebook twitter | RSS

6
Comments

ambassador Report View

A Book Review/Report after reading an environmental book

by Xolani Mnisi | 01-07-2019 21:18 recommendations 0

Subject: Supreme Court of Appeal Verdict between Barberton Giants: To Mine or to Conserve?

March 14, 2016                                                                                                                                       

The Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) granted verdict unto the appeal case heard between the Mpumalanga Barberton Mountainland Owners Association (MOA) and The Barberton Mine Company.

The delivered verdict was of the case determining a nature curfew: to mine or NOT to mine…[Mining Law vs Environmental Law] whereby resulted the Supreme Court issued an mandamus; classified the case as “dismissed” following that of the High Courts.

The Barberton Mine Company, an 1884 established gold mining company which controls three mining division operations: Sheba, Consort and Fairview have instituted and lodged a suite post not granted access to the access and initiate mining activities upon the land operated sub by the Barberton Nature Reserve-that which owned by the Barberton Mountainland Owners Association.

This comes post Barberton mines having acquired mining prospecting licenses by the Department of Mineral Resources (DMR), with the estimation of possible gold reserves existing which could provide greater output and revenue for the mine.

Post failed meeting attempts in year 2015, the department, Barberton Mine embarked upon the initiative of launching such a suite at the North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria. Though these attempts deepened into mayhem failure as the DMR Director-General(DG) dismissed the (appeal) case on April 16, 2015.

The Protected Areas Act (PAA) was brought-forward but/yet the court dismissed the application and suggestion therefore.

Seconded auspices from DMR(second appellant), Barberton Mine initiated a suite on the merits of prohibition to access and utilize land. On the other side Barberton Mountainland Owners Association with auspices from Mpumalanga Tourism and Parks Agency (MTPA) which positioned as second appellant stated that such merits ceased being none credible without any basis since the land is an owned by the association itself and nevertheless is conserved sub preservation status: a natural  environmental area; one which its nature, biodiversity, ecology and ecosystem is highly o importance and relevant to the sustainability of the surrounding and core periphery.

Such a statement provided an eloquent indication in support as once understood and encouraged by the Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism. Thus, species classified to be worth natural and heritage importance were noted and considered. More so the discoveries as the court also found that the Barberton Mines intervention would hinder and hamper other future potential environmental findings; discoveries were of note considered in attention.

However though pledging cognizance to the defense, mining was too a base of precognitive importance that though investment is encouraged, sustainability too should also be an aspect of note and accountability. With basis that the mineral prospecting act suggests prohibition to an  mineral prospecting nor activities in any public nor government This was supported by the Constitution : Section 24[Environmental ACT] which provides insight that as accounted and outlined that environmental health and safety is priority of exercise amid the processes and activities of mining as quoted that: …the sustainability of environmental affairs should be performed whilst the social and economic conditions are promoted and uplifted: “…nations mineral and petroleum resources are developed and in an orderly and ecologically sustainable manner while promoting justifiable social and economic development”. The court therefore acknowledged the North High Court decision and thus found that it has exercised a constitutionally invalid action of as to/ upon the actions Barberton Mine and Department of Mineral Resources accountability. However, the appeal by Barberton Mines and the Barberton Mountainland Owners Association stands. Thus the Supreme Court of Appeal (Department of Justice [D.o.J] found the case dismissed with costs.

 

References:

·         The Supreme Court Of Appeal(SCA) Of the Republic of South Africa(RSA) judgement.

Reportable

Case no: 2016/2016

·         News 24 Online digital News Agency



 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ETxlRNg99kuMI9ETyQLV644QoxAyuXu3/view?usp=sharing

https://drive.google.com/file/d/10gAD1Msvkm8qy7ycEsvHDaT7C_ve_l3P/view?usp=sharing

 
Barberton Nature Reserve

XolaniMnisi

  • South Africa Former E-gen Ambassador Xolani Mnisi
 
 

6 Comments

Xolani Mnisi

  • Xolani Mnisi says :
    Which external source Louis? Please find the source and provide it to me. I believe that will be the only time your analysis and decision will form credible base.
    I had never encountered any discrepancies with the former mentor whilst serving as (21st ambassadorship) tenure since i wrote reports of such similar nature. I am disheartened by your immediate decision which served with none consultation. You are supposed to guide and if there is misunderstandings, should arise then the next approach is we account to a fair consultative engagement-not a sudden decision based on suspicion without credible reasons.
    I provided you with a link below the report. Which supports the report and proves that it is not plagiarized.Again, as with other written reports, i research, plan, draft, proofread and write. However, I sincerely hope that this matter will be resolved. I will appreciate response therefore.

    Posted 08-07-2019 17:13

  • Louis Mentor says :
    Hi Xolani,

    I am highly suspicious of the originality of this report. It seems that your report is copied from the external source. Please rewrite the report in a concise manner.

    Thanks,
    Louis Mentor
    Posted 02-07-2019 21:41

  • Rosa Domingos says :
    Hey there Xolani,

    I hope you are well today. I am truely impressed with how the law has sought protection on the environment rather than look to the economic gain that was proposed by the Department of Mineral Resources and Barberton Mine Company.

    It puzzles me as to why the Department of Mineral Resources would push for such a notion that would directly compromise the environmental health and heritage of our country. I am thankful that the case was dismissed at the end of the day.

    This is environmental justice in its peak form!

    Thank you for sharing this article piece with us Xolani!
    With gratitude,
    Rosa
    Posted 02-07-2019 14:46

Xolani Mnisi

  • Xolani Mnisi says :
    Good day Kushal Sharkskin. I profoundly and highly appreciate your valuable insight and response about the report(review article). Indeed, we should, at all times protect he environment through stringent measures and nevertheless not to forget to pledge greater emphasis upon conservation, preservation and sustainability practices. I will surely provide you with more insightful report and analysis about the regions environment. Also, for quality purposes and par the article knowledge, kindly consider the link given above. It will provide you with a much eloquent and concise information about the written article.
    Posted 01-07-2019 22:31

Kushal Naharki

  • Kushal Naharki says :
    Hello Xolani

    I do hope that you are fine and doing great with your works.
    Thank you for your report about the Supreme Court of Appeal Verdict between Barberton Giants: To Mine or to Conserve? We must conserve the nature
    Green Cheers from Nepal :)
    Keep writing great reports.
    We are eager to read more reports from you.

    Regards,
    Kushal Naharki
    Posted 01-07-2019 21:56

Post a comment

Please sign in

Opportunities

2022 Climatescience Olympiad
Date: 26/062022 to 08/08/2022
Type: Online

Youth in Climate Action for Only One Earth
Date: 8/06/2022 to 8/06/2022
Type: Online

  • attendance banner

Resources