Two groups of environmental rights organisations have given notice of their intention to seek consent to be admitted as friends of the court (amici curiae), in court proceedings launched in May by energy and chemicals company Sasol and crude oil processing and refining company the National Petroleum Refiners of South Africa (Natref) against government.

Sasol and Natref’s application aims to set aside the majority of South Africa’s air pollution regulations for big industry.

These regulations are aimed at curbing emissions of dangerous pollutants, which have serious negative health and environmental impacts.

The groups of organisations are environmental and antinuclear organisation Earthlife Africa; international environmental watchdog Greenpeace Africa and nonprofit company Federation for a Sustainable Environment, represented by the nonprofit organisation Centre for Environmental Rights; and nonprofit environmental justice service and developmental organisation groundWork, environmental justice organisation South Durban Community Environmental Alliance, Table View Residents Association, financial adviser CapTrust and National consultative umbrella Habitat Council, represented by the human rights law clinic Legal Resources Centre.

All the organisations involved in this intervention are of the view that, if the application is successful, it will significantly set back the implementation of South Africa’s National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act 2004 and efforts to improve air quality in South Africa.

“We regard this action by Sasol and Natref as nothing short of a complete onslaught on South Africa’s hard-won air quality legislation, and a blatant attempt to undermine the Constitutional right of every South African to an environment not harmful to health and wellbeing,” says groundWork director Bobby Peek.

On May 21, Sasol Synfuels, Natref and Sasol Chemiese Nywerhede Beperk (of which Sasol Infrachem is the relevant operating division), instituted legal proceedings against the Minister of Environmental Affairs and the National Air Quality Officer.

In these proceedings, Sasol and Natref are asking the High Court to set aside a number of minimum emissions standards for 8 subcategories of activities in the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act.

The ‘List of Activities’ published by Environmental Affairs Minister Edna Molewa applies to Sasol and Natref’s operations (and the operations of several other polluting industries) and establishes minimum standards for air pollution emissions, which the Minister believes have or may have a significant detrimental effect on the environment, including health, social conditions, economic conditions, ecological conditions and cultural heritage.

The List of Activities was the end result of a lengthy multistakeholder process convened to determine appropriate minimum emissions standards for a broad range of industrial activities, which have a significant detrimental health and environmental effect.

Sasol and Natref played an integral role in these extended consultation and participation processes, alongside many other industries and civil society organisations. Despite their participation in this standard-setting process, Sasol and Natref submitted applications for exemption and postponement from compliance with the same emissions standards.

All industries, which applied for authorisation, or were authorised before April 1, 2010, are required to comply with so-called “existing plant standards” by April 2015, and with stricter “new plant” standards by April 2020.

The List of Activities makes provision for postponement of compliance with the emissions standards. Given that these are minimum standards, no exemption is legally permissible. As a result, Sasol has subsequently been compelled to replace its exemption applications with applications for postponement of the standards.

Sasol, Natref and State-owned utility Eskom’s applications for postponement and exemption from compliance with the minimum emissions standards have been opposed by civil society and community organisations, and the outcome of these applications is awaited.

Several of these civil society organisations participated in the multiyear multistakeholder negotiations that preceded the setting of emissions standards.

“The final published standards were clearly a compromise falling short of what is actually achievable using best available technology. As a result, South Africa’s minimum emissions standards are already more lenient than those required of big industry in other parts of the world, including other countries in which Sasol operates,” says Environmental Justice Vaal Alliance coordinator Samson Mokoena.

“Despite being actively involved in setting the emissions standards, and knowing about them for several years, Sasol and Natref have failed to take the necessary steps to enable compliance with the standards. In its public statements and annual reports, Sasol claims to be committed to sustainable development,” says Centre for Environmental Rights attorney Tracey Davies.

This litigation makes it clear that these public statements are simply greenwash, designed only to provide false comfort to shareholders who take these claims at face value, she adds.

“Rather than setting an example by genuinely committing to reducing its environmental impacts, Sasol and Natref are instead leading the vanguard of big industry determined to profit at the expense of our health, our environment, and the quality of life of future generations,” says Federation for a Sustainable Environment director Dr Koos Pretorius.

“Compliance with the law should not be optional, and it is completely outrageous that mega polluters like Sasol and Natref are wasting time and money by challenging air quality legislation, which has been set to protect people’s health. Pollution is a huge problem in this country, and people’s lives are at risk – compliance by mega polluters is the only socially and environmentally just option,” says Greenpeace Africa senior climate and energy campaign manager Melita Steele.