FRANCE &
GERMANY ARE REDUCING NUCLEAR POWER. GERMANY HAS CLOSED EIGHT PLANTS AND
IS REDUCING ALL TO SWITCH OFF WITHIN A 20 YEAR PERIOD. CHINA IS SPENDING MORE
MONEY ON RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT THAN NUCLEAR POWER
Is Nuclear Power
the Answer to South Africa's Energy Needs? NO! Why?
·
Nuclear power will take a minimum of eight years
to develop before it will contribute to the supply of power in South Africa.
·
Terrorism risks are high with the potential for nuclear
property being targeted.
·
Nuclear waste would provide South Africa with
more headaches and a damaged planet earth with huge stores of ocean dumped
nuclear or underground nuclear waste for future generations to deal with.
·
Currently many countries dump nuclear waste in
the ocean. Hardly the answer for planet earth.
·
Two French Nuclear Operations are in financial
ruin. One 'Areva' is technically bankrupt but is being considered by the South African government as a frontrunner for our nuclear business?
·
Russian Nuclear Operations have taken
between 27 to 30 years to build and have been disbanded/discontinued/delayed without producing a megawatt of power. One of these operations 'Rosatom' is also considered a frontrunner for South Africa's nuclear business?
·
The risks are high and the costs enormous and
South Africa does not have the time nor tax payers money to waste.
A
discussion on nuclear power generation in South Africa took place yesterday
presenting the facts. WWF South Africa, the Heinrich Böll Stiftung and Centre of Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Studies hosted the public debate on the prudence of South Africa’s nuclear
energy ambitions. The view point in support of government’s decision to expand nuclear power
generation on the basis that it will improve energy security and cover the
shortfall in meeting the country’s electricity demand. The second suggests that
in addition to nuclear power being costly and environmentally risky,
electricity demand in South Africa is in fact dropping and argues against any
new nuclear build programmes in the country.
The debate, moderated by Talk Radio 702’s Xolani Gwala, drew on expert views from government, business, academia and civil society. Speakers included:
The debate, moderated by Talk Radio 702’s Xolani Gwala, drew on expert views from government, business, academia and civil society. Speakers included:
His
Excellency Walter Lindner, German Ambassador to South Africa
Phumzile Tshelane, CEO: South African Nuclear Energy Corporation
Mycle Schneider, Independent International Energy and Nuclear Policy Analyst and the Convening Lead Author and Publisher of the Annual World Nuclear Industry Status Report
Adv. Kevin Malunga, Deputy Public Protector of South Africa
Kumi Naidoo, South African human rights activist and previously the International Executive Director of international environmentalist group Greenpeace
Saliem Fakir, WWF South Africa
Based
on the facts presented, the conclusion for many was that Nuclear Power is NOT
right for South Africa. The conference and
engagement continues today.
Phumzile Tshelane, CEO: South African Nuclear Energy Corporation
Mycle Schneider, Independent International Energy and Nuclear Policy Analyst and the Convening Lead Author and Publisher of the Annual World Nuclear Industry Status Report
Adv. Kevin Malunga, Deputy Public Protector of South Africa
Kumi Naidoo, South African human rights activist and previously the International Executive Director of international environmentalist group Greenpeace
Saliem Fakir, WWF South Africa
Based
on the facts presented, the conclusion for many was that Nuclear Power is NOT
right for South Africa. The conference and
engagement continues today.
SA TO REQUEST PROPOSALS FOR NUCLEAR POWER
10
March 2016 at 07:30am By: Siseko Njobeni Johannesburg –
BUSINESS REPOR
The
government plans to issue a request for proposals by the end of the month to
add 9 600 megawatts of nuclear power to the national grid, Department of Energy
director-general Thabane Zulu announced yesterday. Zulu said discussions were ongoing with the
Treasury about the costs of the fleet of nuclear plants, adding that issuing
the request for proposals was a critical milestone for the nuclear programme
and responses would provide an indication of a possible funding model. Zulu said: “We want to make sure that the
process plan is thorough, effective and properly implemented.”
CABINET’S
DECISION
Gaopalelwe
Santswere, the chairman of the SA Young Nuclear Professionals Society, said
yesterday that responses to the request for proposals would give an indication
of whether the country could afford the programme. “The only way to know if the country can
afford the programme is by testing the market. When the proposals come back we
can decide if it is affordable,” Santswere said. He added that issuing the request for
proposals in the middle of unfavourable economic conditions was not necessarily
a bad thing. “How long are we going to
wait? The market is also experiencing the crunch. People are also looking for
business. So we may actually end up with a good deal,” he said. The request for proposals follows the
cabinet’s decision in December to give the department the green light to issue
a request for proposal for the procurement programme. Although the cost of the programme remains
unknown, Zulu said the final funding model would depend on the response of the
market to the request for proposal. He
said a decision to proceed with the nuclear programme would take place after
the completion of the request for proposals process.
ROSATOM AND AREVA
ARE REGARDED AS FRONTRUNNERS. AREVA DECLINED TO COMMENT. (AREVA IS TECHNICALLY BANKRUPT)
“I find this
urgency in getting this process under way difficult to reconcile with the
commitment made by the president in his State of the Nation Address that South
Africa would only develop nuclear power plants on a scale and pace that the
country can afford.” Hartmut Winkler, a physics professor at the
University of Johannesburg. Winkler also
questioned the affordability of the programme given the current unfavourable
economic conditions. “Furthermore,
how does one request proposals if the ‘scale’ of the project is still to be
determined? I would like to see a clear nuclear roadmap, with detailed
technical specifications, site maps, projected costs and timeframes, with
up-to-date projections of electricity demand and comparative costs of
alternative power generation options”
Risks are tremendously high, enormous costs, disregard for planet earth in producing nuclear waste and foremost that all of this will become the biggest cost procurement item in the history of South Africa, this becomes a
matter for the South African Human
Rights Commission, an independent
institution subject to the Constitution and the law, formed to protect the people and
the environment of South Africa. They should assess and decide with South African active citizen participation whether Nuclear Power is in fact
right for South Africa and all South Africans not just those who are party and stand to gain
in status and / or by network by being courted and forming agreements on behalf of all
who reside in and live on South African soil.
ZUMA, THE GUPTAS AND THE RUSSIANS — THE INSIDE STORY
2010
the Guptas (a family well-known for their backing of Zuma), along with Zuma’s
son, Duduzane, emerged as buyers of a South African uranium mine — the Dominion
Rietkuil Uranium Project — amid claims that Zuma intervened to ease state
funding for the project. This uranium is
likely to supply the South African nuclear projects.
WHO BENEFITS?
Will
the nuclear programme at least result in cheaper electricity? Based on findings from the Council for
Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), the (levelised) cost of electricity
from nuclear power is 25% more expensive than new coal or solar photovoltaic,
and 67% more expensive than wind [Fin24][58]. Columnist Allister Sparks wrote that the
nuclear programme would result in 10 to, maybe, 50 times higher electricity
costs than we are paying now [Business Day][59].
THE ROLE PLAYED BY THE SOUTH AFRICAN
HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION'S ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL RIGHTS REPORTS
IN GOOD GOVERNANCE
IN SOUTH AFRICA
D Horsten*
1.
Introduction
The preamble of the South African Constitution1
contains the commitment to, amongst other things, establish a society based on
democratic values, social justice and fundamental human rights, lay the foundations
for a democratic and open society in which government is based on the will of
the people and every citizen is equally protected by law and improve the
quality of life of all citizens and free the potential of each person. One of
the methods used to achieve these objectives is the inclusion of enforceable
socio-economic rights in the Bill of Rights.2
Despite numerous debates surrounding the issue of enforceability of
socio-economic rights, it has become evident that these rights are indeed
enforceable. Not only does section 7(2) of the Constitution place the state
under an obligation to respect, protect, promote and fulfil all rights in the
Bill of Rights, including socio-economic rights, but the Constitutional Court
has in various decisions passed judgment on issues relating to socio-economic
rights, underpinning the fact that these rights are indeed enforceable.3
The fact that socio-economic rights have been included in the Bill of
Rights and are enforceable is, however, not sufficient to achieve the aims set
out in the preamble. In order for these rights to be of any value to the people
they seek to protect, they need to be implemented.4
One of the ways in which the implementation of these rights is monitored is by
means of the South African Human Rights Commission's5
annual Economic and Social Rights Reports. The aim of this contribution
is to assess these reports and to establish the degree to which they contribute
to good governance in South Africa.6
2 The
constitutional mandate of the South African Human Rights Commission
The Constitution establishes a number of institutions to help ensure
that the rights in the Constitution become reality, one of these institutions
being the South African Human Rights Commission.7
These institutions, referred to as Chapter 9 institutions,8
are independent organs with the general mandate of strengthening constitutional
democracy in South Africa.9
They are independent, subject only to the Constitution and the law, and they
must be impartial and must exercise their powers and perform their functions
without fear, favour or prejudice.10
These institutions are accountable to the National Assembly, and must report on
their activities and the performance of their functions to the Assembly at
least once a year.11
Such national human rights institutions have, according to the Committee on
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, a potentially crucial role to play in
promoting and ensuring the indivisibility and interdependence of all human
rights and it is, therefore, essential that full attention be given to
economic, social and cultural rights in all of the relevant activities of these
institutions.12
The SAHRC has a general mandate to monitor and assess the realisation of
all human rights13
as well as a special mandate in relation to socio-economic rights.14
This additional role of the SAHRC is of great importance given South Africa's
history of racial discrimination which has resulted in many South Africans
suffering from socio-economic disadvantages.15
This
special mandate requires of the SAHRC, each year, to require relevant organs of
state to provide it with information on the measures that they have taken
towards the realisation of the rights in the Bill of Rights concerning housing,16
health care,17
food,18
water,19
social security,20
education21
and the environment.22 Although
this special mandate merely requires of the SAHRC to require the organs of
state to provide information, it would be pointless if left at that. In terms
of its general mandate, it would thus appear that it is required of the SAHRC
to use this information in order to monitor and assess the realisation of the
rights in question.
The Constitution also makes provision for additional powers and functions
of the SAHRC to be prescribed by national legislation.23
The legislation in question, the Human Rights Commission Act,24
indicates that the SAHRC must submit to the National Assembly an annual
report, a report on any findings of a serious nature and a report on an issue
whenever it deems it necessary.25
According to Newman,26
a purposive reading of section 184(3) would assume that the SAHRC must use the
information collected towards some form of report or assessment.
The way in which the SAHRC fulfils this function is by means of its Economic
and Social Rights Reports. In these reports the SAHRC not only monitors the
legislation and policies which have been adopted to realise these rights, but
also the budget allocated towards realising them and the actual results of the
measures.27
The role of
the SAHRC's reports in the promotion of good governance
The concept of good
governance is increasingly being accepted as the standard for domestic
governance.81
According to Mafunisa,82
governance includes the exercise of political power for directing and
regulating socio-economic affairs. Although no generally accepted definition of
good governance exists, it can be broadly defined as the responsible use of
political authority to manage a nation's affairs.83
It is understood to consist of various components, including ensuring the rule
of law (and in the South African context, obviously, ensuring that governance
complies with the Constitution), improving the efficiency and accountability of
the public sector, tackling corruption, effectively protecting human rights and
allowing for participation by the people in such governance.84
The
public needs to be able to participate, not only through elected
representatives (parliament) and non-elected actors (political parties and
public interest groups), but also directly.85 Public accountability, according
to Hilliard and Kemp,86 implies that public functionaries
have to provide explanations to justify positive or negative results obtained
in the performance of their daily activities. Good governance
must be both substantive and procedural.87
In other words, it must exist not only in respect of aims and results, but also
in respect of procedures and is of little use if it is not accompanied by
socio-economic progress.88
It needs to have a strong preventive aspect, giving society sound structures
for economic and social development.89
In order to comply
with the principle of good governance, attention to socio-economic rights is
thus imperative. Government action in this regard needs to be compliant with
its constitutional obligations and government needs to be held accountable to
the people. The
people who are protected by the inclusion of socio-economic rights in the
Constitution need to be in a position to both make themselves heard on the
issue of the realisation (or non-realisation) of their rights and to be able to
enforce these rights.
Conclusion
The SAHRC, as a Chapter 9 institution, plays an extremely important role
in the monitoring and assessment of the realisation of socio-economic rights in
South Africa. The Economic and Social Rights Reports of the SAHRC serve
as the primary measure in the fulfillment of its constitutional obligations and
despite various criticisms which can be leveled against both the reporting
procedures and the contents of the reports, have thus far been relatively
successful in the evaluation of government's activities relating to this
mandate.
The role of the reports in the promotion of good
governance in respect of the realisation of socio-economic rights could, however,
be improved. The primary manner in which this could be done is by allowing for
a greater degree of participation of civil society and NGO's in the drafting of
these reports, thereby ensuring the maximum degree of public participation,
which is one of the cornerstones of good governance.
