The Constitutional Court on Tuesday, 16 September 2025, reserved judgment in the matter brought by Wild Coast communities and environmental organisations against Shell and Impact Africa. The case challenges moves to renew an exploration right, first granted in 2014, to search for oil and gas off the Wild Coast. It matters because the outcome will determine whether offshore exploration can proceed and how communities must be consulted.
The applicants asked the Court to overturn a Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) order that allowed Shell to seek renewal of the right while suspending a High Court ruling that had found the right unlawful in 2022 and halted seismic work. In May last year, the SCA agreed with much of the High Court judgment but gave Shell an opportunity to keep the right alive during the renewal process.
A full day of argument focused on what would be a “just and equitable” remedy. Counsel for the communities said the SCA’s approach was not just, because it overlooked the lack of meaningful public participation before the right was granted. They argued that consultation cannot be fixed at the renewal stage and that the High Court’s order setting aside the right should stand. Adv Nick Ferreira warned the Court should not become “a platform for unpleaded submissions and for turning back the hands of time,” while Adv Tembeka Ngcukaitobi SC said dignity requires communities be heard on decisions affecting their heritage and ancestral lands. If any consultation is ordered, they argued it must start afresh with a new application.
Shell, Impact Africa and the Minister of Mineral Resources argued that public participation during the renewal process—when read with the SCA ruling—would address earlier deficiencies and cure any infringement of constitutional and environmental rights. Shell’s counsel, Adv Adrian Friedman, said the Constitutional Court could “panelbeat” the SCA order to ensure proper consultation in renewal.
Outside court and in statements, community leaders and civil society expressed cautious optimism. Sinegugu Zukulu of Sustaining the Wild Coast said the case is about “the dignity that comes with participation in decisions that directly affect us.” Fefekazi Nozaza from Port St Johns said, “Our ocean is not for sale—it’s our sacred place, we live and eat from it.” Delme Cupido of Natural Justice said profit should not trump the “intangible, incalculable value” of people’s connection to the coast. Wilmien Wicomb of the Legal Resources Centre cautioned against giving corporations “a free pass” where the law has not been followed. Ricky Stone of Cullinans and Associates called the case a catalyst for stronger public participation in mining-related applications. Eugene Perumal of Greenpeace Africa said “legal engineering” cannot replace full, meaningful engagement. Wild Coast resident Siyabonga Ndovela said the presence of many coastal organisations at court showed what the case means to fishing communities, while Melissa Groenink-Groves of Natural Justice said the day was pivotal in placing “human rights above corporate greed.”
The Court’s decision will be delivered in due course.
