Court Oversight and the Cautious Approach in Operation
The Western Cape High Court has made a historic decision, overturning the South African government's approval for offshore oil and gas exploration in Block 5/6/7. This ruling, delivered by Judge Nobahle Mangcu-Lockwood on 13 August 2025, marks a significant milestone in the country's environmental jurisprudence.
The court's findings repudiated the final Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) prepared by Total Energies EP South Africa, and held that the environmental authorization, as granted by the Department of Mineral Resources and Energy, failed to comply with the standards set out in the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA) and the Integrated Coastal Management Act (ICMA).
The EIA process had numerous deficiencies, including the failure to adequately assess the socio-economic impacts of a potential oil spill or blowout on small-scale fishing communities, the omission of climate change impacts, and a lack of attention to transboundary harm. The ruling confirmed the need to assess cross-border environmental harm, violating both customary international law and South Africa's own statutory framework when transboundary risks were not assessed.
Total Energies and Shell will now need to undertake further studies, submit new or amended assessments, and provide publicly available emergency response plans. The assessments must include a full analysis of potential socio-economic and climate impacts, a comprehensive evaluation under the ICMA, spill modelling, transboundary risk assessments, and subject to meaningful public participation.
The decision was initiated by civil society organizations The Green Connection and Natural Justice. The ruling serves as a judicial endorsement of the long-term collective interests of people and the natural environment, reaffirming environmental rights as actionable and enforceable. It marks a doctrinal shift toward a model of environmental governance that centers the rights of communities, the voice of civil society, and the enduring value of ecological integrity.
The ruling delivers a powerful message to affected communities: the law does not exist solely to facilitate development, but also to safeguard the oceans, livelihoods, and rights of those whose futures depend on their protection. For environmental lawyers, energy law specialists, and public interest practitioners alike, the case serves as a pivotal reference point in the evolving landscape of South African environmental jurisprudence.
The court's analysis emphasized the role of climate change in environmental decision-making, finding that exploratory activities must consider the full life-cycle climate consequences of any such project. The ruling reasserts the standards of administrative rationality, environmental precaution, and procedural justice.
However, no information was found in the search results about which organizations challenged the South African Ministry of Environment's decision or about the parties involved in the decision. Despite this gap in information, the Western Cape High Court ruling positions the judgment within a growing global consensus on transnational environmental responsibility.
