Abstract
The judgment in Trustees for the Time Being of the Groundwork Trust v Minister of Environmental Affairs rests on a finding that the right in section 24 of the Constitution consists of two separate rights in subsections (a) and (b), and that the right in section 24(a) is immediately realisable. I argue in this article that this approach is incorrect and that a logical and contextual interpretation of section 24 cannot justify the conclusion that the court reached. I argue that section 24(b) is a qualifying "internal modifier" to section 24(a), and that, in practical terms and due to the modifier in section 24(b), in many situations section 24 would have to be regarded as implementable over time, and not immediately. Such implementation would have to be reasonable. The article also considers the use of the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act to address the unacceptable level of air pollution in the area known as the Highveld Priority Area.
Publisher
Academy of Science of South Africa
Subject
Law,Sociology and Political Science
Reference46 articles.
1. Bibliography
2. Literature
3. Altieri KE and Keen SL "Public Health Benefits of Reducing Exposure to Ambient Fine Particulate Matter in South Africa" 2019 Science of the Total Environment 610-620
4. Centre for Environmental Rights Zero Hour: Poor Governance of Mining and the Violation of Environmental Rights in Mpumalanga (CER Cape Town 2016)
5. Currie I and De Waal J "Interpretation of the Bill of Rights" in Currie I and De Waal J The Bill of Rights Handbook 6th ed (Juta Cape Town 2013) ch 6