Publications
Partners
- Solidarity is going to court to challenge the declaration of a state of disaster to deal with the electricity crisis.
- The organisation accused the government of being the cause of the crisis.
- It said the state of disaster was intended as a temporary intervention - and should only be used when no other option was available.
Solidarity announced that it would launch a legal challenge to the declaration of a state of disaster with regard to the electricity crisis.
In a statement on Tuesday, Solidarity said the electricity crisis did not meet the definition of a disaster in terms of the relevant legislation.
During his State of the Nation Address (SONA) last week, President Cyril Ramaphosa announced he would appoint a minister of electricity in the Presidency and that a state of disaster had been declared.
Ramaphosa said: "The state of disaster will enable us to provide practical measures that we need to take to support businesses in the food production, storage and retail supply chain, including for the rollout of generators, solar panels and uninterrupted power supply."
Ramaphosa said it would enable the government to exempt critical infrastructure, such as hospitals and water treatment plants, from load shedding.
READ | SONA debate dominated by electricity crisis
"And it will enable us to accelerate energy projects and limit regulatory requirements while maintaining rigorous environmental protections, procurement principles and technical standards."
However, the chief executive of Solidarity, Dirk Hermann, said the government itself was the cause of the electricity crisis.
He said:
"We do not have short memories either. We remember the abuse of power during the Covid-19 state of disaster and how disaster funds were looted. A state of disaster to deal with the electricity crisis is a disaster."
Hermann said a state of disaster was intended as a temporary intervention - and should only be used when no other option was available.
"This means that, if another legislative instrument is available to deal with this state of exception, it must be used," he said.
"All the measures announced in President Ramaphosa's SONA can be implemented by using other statutory instruments. If other instruments do exist, disaster legislation does not apply.
"If this state of disaster is allowed to continue, a dangerous precedent will be set. This could mean that South Africa will face a future of being a disaster democracy. Government failures, such as failure to deliver water and sewerage services, failing municipalities, the implosion of infrastructure and other problems can then also be managed by bypassing normal democratic processes by declaring a state of disaster. That was never the intention of disaster management legislation."
The organisation accused the government of having a "poor track record" with regard to disaster management.
Hermann said:
He said Covid-19 emergency funds became a source for looting, resulting in dozens of companies being implicated in fraud.
And, because of this, Hermann believed history would prove that disaster funds would, no doubt, again be looted during the electricity state of disaster.
"Only the naïve will think otherwise," he added.
Meanwhile, the DA indicated it would also be going to court to challenge the state of disaster.
This was despite several previous statements during which the party seemingly called for a state of disaster.
On Thursday evening, DA leader John Steenhuisen said in his post-SONA statement: "In the absence of any real solutions to the permanent load shedding crisis created by the ANC, President Cyril Ramaphosa during his SONA address desperately grasped at the straw of a sweeping national state of disaster. The DA can confirm that we have already briefed our lawyers to challenge the announcement in court."
