Sharing Blog

The court has a duty to step in and protect those who are offended and the environment. Judge rules in the Shell seismic survey case

Taryn Pereira

One Ocean Hub, Rhodes University

Visit website
Theme
Tag
  • advocacy,
  • coastal communities,
  • deep sea,
  • Environmental threats
Target Group
  • Entrepreneurs,
  • Journalists,
  • Policy makers
Language
  • English
Region
Location map

As a result of the innovative partnership between researchers, NGOS and small-scale fishers, ad of the use of art-based research approaches, small-scale fishers’ human rights were recognized.

Published on October 2 2022, this blog discusses the events of September 1, 2022, where the High Court in Makhanda, South Africa, invalidated Shell and Impact Africa’s exploration rights for seismic surveys along the Wild Coast, citing inadequate consultation with local communities. This ruling, a victory for human rights and environmental justice, highlighted failures to consider the impacts on food security, cultural heritage, and climate change. Key excerpts from the judgement emphasized meaningful consultation, the precautionary principle, and the sacred relationship coastal communities have with the ocean. The case, supported by significant public mobilization and strategic legal arguments, showcased the role of coastal communities and legal advocates. One Ocean Hub researchers contributed by assisting with affidavits, providing expert evidence, and facilitating community engagement throughout the legal process.

As a result of the innovative partnership between researchers, NGOS and small-scale fishers, ad of the use of art-based research approaches, small-scale fishers’ human rights were recognized by national courts in South Africa, with particular attention to their cultural rights, their right to food and their right to participate in decisions that affect their lives.