The Constitutional Court of South Africa has struck down an offshore exploration right held by Shell and Impact Africa off the Wild Coast, ruling that the affected communities were not meaningfully consulted in the process. The court's decision, handed down on 14 August 2026, effectively ends the companies' ability to retain the exploration right through a renewal process, marking a major legal setback for the energy firms. The ruling underscores the judiciary's emphasis on the rights of local communities and their role in decisions that impact their environment and way of life. The exploration right in question was initially granted to Impact Africa in 2014 and later renewed. In 2021, Shell acquired a 50% participating interest in the right. Over the years, the legality of the exploration right came under scrutiny due to concerns about inadequate consultation with the communities living along the Wild Coast. These communities, primarily isiXhosa-speaking, claimed that their voices were not heard in the decision-making process regarding the potential extraction of oil and gas in the region. The case began in the Eastern Cape Division of the High Court, where the court found that the granting and renewal of the exploration right were unlawful and procedurally unfair. The high court ordered the setting aside of the exploration right. However, the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) upheld the finding of unlawfulness but suspended the setting aside of the right, allowing for a third renewal application with an additional public-participation process aimed at addressing the initial consultation failures. This suspension became the focal point of the Constitutional Court proceedings. Communities and environmental organizations, including Sustaining the Wild Coast and Natural Justice, challenged the SCA's decision, arguing that the proposed remedy did not adequately address the fundamental issue of non-consultation. They contended that conducting a consultation after the fact could not rectify the original violation of the communities' rights to be involved in decisions affecting their lives and environment. Justice Jody Kollapen presided over the Constitutional Court hearing and emphasized the historical context of the dispute within South Africa's broader narrative of dispossession and the ongoing struggles of coastal communities to protect their land, marine resources, and ways of life from extractive industries. He noted that the sea holds profound significance for the Wild Coast communities, extending beyond mere economic value to encompass ancestral practices, traditional healing, and spiritual life. The court's judgment highlighted the inadequacies in the original consultation process. Impact Africa had not thoroughly identified all affected parties, and notices were published in newspapers that were inaccessible to the communities. Additionally, despite being informed by traditional leaders that engagement with the broader affected communities was necessary, no direct engagement took place. The court stressed that consultation is not merely about providing an opportunity for individuals to express opinions; it is fundamentally linked to the dignity and agency of the affected communities. The ruling stated that requiring consultation now would not compensate for the lack of consultation at the outset, thus infringing upon the communities' right to dignity. Sinegugu Zukulu, co-founder and director of Sustaining the Wild Coast, expressed relief and pride following the judgment. He described the fight as not just a personal endeavor but a collective effort for the health and well-being of the planet. Zukulu emphasized the concern for those most vulnerable to the impacts of extractive activities, highlighting the importance of protecting both people and the environment. The ruling has significant implications for offshore oil and gas exploration in South Africa, particularly concerning administrative justice and the constitutional rights of communities whose livelihoods and cultural practices are deeply intertwined with the ocean. Environmental organizations view the litigation as a pivotal moment in determining whether companies and the state can rectify serious procedural failures years after an exploration right was originally granted. Shell and Impact Africa had previously argued that canceling the exploration right would result in substantial financial loss and that further consultation during the renewal process could offer a fair resolution. However, the Constitutional Court's decision closes that avenue, ensuring that the exploration right and its renewals remain canceled. This outcome represents a decisive victory for the Wild Coast communities, who have consistently opposed seismic exploration in the area since at least 2021, advocating for their meaningful involvement in decisions that affect their coastline.
★
Keep the news honest.
ObjectiveNews is reader-funded and ad-free — we show you the bias instead of hiding it. Support independent journalism for €4/month.
Become a Supporter
ZA
