Offshore oil and gas, mining and renewable energies share many common practices and are guided by similar legislative processes en route to reconnaissance, exploration, production, and eventually rehabilitation.
They also operate in a similar environment and often target the same grass-roots communities, depending on their proposed geographical area of operations.
Within the highly contested South African context, the main actors include environmental non-governmental organisations (NGOs), community activists and community-based organisations (CBOs), corporations, regulators, environmental assessment practitioners, exploration companies, and of course, the South African courts.
More often than not, these actors band together to drive their agendas. For example, environmental NGOs, community activists and CBOs would normally consolidate and use the courts to address their grievances, while corporations, exploration companies and environmental practitioners turn towards the regulators and government to strengthen their position.
At a global level, this may be considered “normal” and even “ethical” behaviour, but what stands out locally, like a sore thumb, are the claims by the majority of these actors that they represent the views and opinions of our grassroots communities.
Without any empirical evidence whatsoever to test the veracity of these claims, which infringes on the constitutional rights of grass-roots communities to participate in an environment where the playing fields have been levelled and informed decision-making from all is considered, one can only assume that the process is fatally flawed. These unfounded claims of representation also imply that grassroots communities are incapable of speaking for themselves.
Consultation processes in South African grass-roots communities are a daunting task that requires a broad and detailed understanding of our historical, cultural, political, traditional and religious backgrounds.
Of paramount importance is knowledge of local dynamics, which is required to provide the necessary capacity-building towards informed decision-making by grassroots communities. Furthermore, all consultation processes must align themselves with basic human rights and constitutional imperatives that provide that all South Africans should share in the wealth of its natural resources.
Whichever way one views the current consultation processes in our communities, it remains biased towards the party initiating the dialogue in our communities. Due to an inadequate regulatory process, all and sundry are now consulting in our communities and claiming to be the voice of the people when, in actual fact, a “record of individual informed decision making” is required – if our interpretation of the Eastern Cape High Court case against Shell is correct.
My view on the current challenges in these sectors is that all actors, with the exception of the regulators and government departments, should NOT lead grassroots consultation processes, but rather be participants on centralised multi-stakeholder platforms. However, in the case where Host/ Priority communities are identified, these actors must also form part of a community multi-stakeholder platform that is opened to all Host/Priority community members.
The Upstream Petroleum Resources Development Bill guides the regulator to be present at all consultation processes. Although this may appear to be an impossible task amid grassroots consultation processes that are being conducted out of all quarters, it does present the regulator with an opportunity to exercise independent oversight in a more controlled environment.
This oversight is vitally important when determining the credibility and integrity of any grassroots consultation process.
* Pedro Garcia.
** The views expressed here are not necessarily those of Independent Media.
Do you have something on your mind; or want to comment on the big stories of the day? We would love to hear from you. Please send your letters to arglet@inl.co.za.
All letters to be considered for publication, must contain full names, addresses and contact details (not for publication)