South Africa’s Constitutional Court has blocked Shell and Impact Africa from carrying out offshore oil and gas exploration along the Wild Coast. In an August 14 landmark judgment, the apex court set aside disputed exploration rights, ruling that flawed public consultations and the failure to respect community rights rendered the project unlawful.
The Constitutional Court’s Landmark Ruling and Rejection of Retrospective Consultation
The Constitutional Court delivered its decisive judgment on August 14, setting aside the exploration rights held jointly by oil giant Shell and South African firm Impact Africa (South Africa’s top court blocks Shell oil exploration off country’s Wild Coast). The ruling effectively blocks the energy companies from conducting a 3D seismic survey off the Eastern Cape province coastline, ending a legal battle that began when Shell announced its exploration plans in 2021 (South Africa’s top court blocks Shell oil exploration off country’s Wild Coast). The majority judgment was written by Justice Jody Kollapen (ConCourt shuts down Shell’s Wild Coast oil and gas exploration bid).
The apex court overturned a 2024 Supreme Court of Appeal decision that had permitted Shell and Impact Africa to continue offshore seismic testing while attempting to fix flaws in their originally obtained exploration rights (Activists celebrate Concourt ruling against Wild Coast oil and gas exploration). The Supreme Court of Appeal had suspended the setting aside of the rights to allow Mineral Resources Minister Gwede Mantashe to consider a renewal application alongside a fresh round of public participation (ConCourt shuts down Shell’s Wild Coast oil and gas exploration bid). The Constitutional Court rejected this approach entirely, ruling that the original defects could not be cured more than a decade after the fact (ConCourt shuts down Shell’s Wild Coast oil and gas exploration bid).
“Consultation is not merely about the opportunity to express a view or influence an outcome. On a more fundamental level, regardless of whether the product of consultation has any effect, it is a process which affirms human dignity by affording a seat at the table to those whose lives and livelihoods may be impacted by decisions.”
Justice Jody Kollapen, writing the majority opinion
Any further attempt to pursue exploration will now require an entirely new application and decision-making process (Shell Wild Coast Oil Exploration Constitutional Court Ruling).
Origins of the Legal Battle and the Fight Over Seismic Surveys
The dispute traces back to 2014, when the Department of Mineral Resources and Energy granted Impact Africa Limited the right to undertake a seismic survey to search for oil and gas reserves on the Wild Coast. Impact Africa is a subsidiary of Impact Oil & Gas Limited, which transferred a 50% stake of its exploration rights to Shell in 2021 (South Africa’s top court blocks Shell oil exploration off country’s Wild Coast). The companies reportedly spent about R1.1 billion on the project before it stalled (ConCourt shuts down Shell’s Wild Coast oil and gas exploration bid).
When Shell announced plans to conduct 3D seismic surveys in late 2021, local fishing communities and environmental organizations mobilized immediately (South Africa’s top court blocks Shell oil exploration off country’s Wild Coast). Opponents argued that the powerful sound waves used to detect seabed reserves would harm marine life, threaten local livelihoods, and violate their spiritual and cultural connections to the sea (Shell Wild Coast Oil Exploration Constitutional Court Ruling). Sustaining the Wild Coast, Natural Justice, Greenpeace Africa, All Rise Attorneys, and local community members secured an interdict that brought the survey work to a halt (ConCourt shuts down Shell’s Wild Coast oil and gas exploration bid).
In September 2022, the High Court in Makhanda set aside the exploration right, finding that affected communities had not been adequately informed or consulted, and that officials failed to properly consider potential impacts on marine life, climate change, and cultural rights (ConCourt shuts down Shell’s Wild Coast oil and gas exploration bid). While the Supreme Court of Appeal later kept the unlawful rights alive pending a renewal process, the Constitutional Court’s final ruling closed that door (Shell Wild Coast Oil Exploration Constitutional Court Ruling).
Activist Reactions and Economic Warnings from Parliament
Environmental activists hailed the judgment as a historic win for coastal communities (Activists celebrate Concourt ruling against Wild Coast oil and gas exploration). Desmond D’Sa, coordinator of the South Durban Community Environmental Alliance, said they take great strength from that victory for the people of South Africa
(Activists celebrate Concourt ruling against Wild Coast oil and gas exploration). He criticized Shell for attempting to bypass and not to work with anyone
while going straight to government
for approvals (Activists celebrate Concourt ruling against Wild Coast oil and gas exploration).
Carmen Mannarino of the Masifundise Development Trust emphasized that fishing communities secured a vital precedent (South Africa’s top court blocks Shell oil exploration off country’s Wild Coast). The court recognized that exploring for resources in light of potential future financial benefits does not compare to the constitutionally recognized rights of fishing communities,
Mannarino noted (South Africa’s top court blocks Shell oil exploration off country’s Wild Coast). Melissa Groenink, an attorney with Natural Justice, added that as the apex court’s first ruling on community and environmental rights regarding oil and gas exploitation, the decision could influence other legal battles currently underway (South Africa’s top court blocks Shell oil exploration off country’s Wild Coast).
Conversely, government officials expressed concern over the economic implications. Mikateko Mahlaule, chairperson of Parliament’s Committee on Mineral and Petroleum Resources, stated that while the ruling must be respected, continued legal uncertainty could threaten investment, exploration, and job creation in the petroleum sector (Activists celebrate Concourt ruling against Wild Coast oil and gas exploration).
“The country cannot afford for potentially significant economic opportunities and job creation initiatives to remain permanently at the conceptual stage because of uncertainty around exploration. Exploration is the process through which we establish whether resources exist and whether they can ultimately be developed for the benefit of the economy and the people of South Africa.”
Mikateko Mahlaule, Chairperson of Parliament’s Committee on Mineral and Petroleum Resources
Broader Implications for South Africa’s Energy Transition and Climate Policy
Political economist Professor Patrick Bond argued that the ruling extends far beyond halting a single project, noting that it sends a strong signal regarding climate obligations and the rights of past, present, and future generations (ConCourt Wild Coast ruling was about more than stopping Shell, says analyst). Bond pointed out that the court explicitly acknowledged the cultural and spiritual significance of the Wild Coast, including ancestral rights (ConCourt Wild Coast ruling was about more than stopping Shell, says analyst). He contrasted the judiciary’s approach with Mineral and Petroleum Resources Minister Gwede Mantashe’s push to drill, drill, drill
(ConCourt Wild Coast ruling was about more than stopping Shell, says analyst).
Furthermore, the Constitutional Court’s majority opinion weighed international commitments and the International Court of Justice Advisory Opinion on climate change, emphasizing that decisions must be informed by the foreseeable impacts of emissions (South Africa’s top court blocks Shell oil exploration off country’s Wild Coast).
Whether fossil fuel investors will pivot toward renewable alternatives, or if future legal battles over offshore energy will continue to test the boundaries of South Africa’s administrative and environmental law, remains to be seen (Activists celebrate Concourt ruling against Wild Coast oil and gas exploration).
