Sakeliga, in collaboration with Agri North-West, TLU SA and affected businesses, launched an application in court against Eskom, for the court to review and set aside the utility’s load reduction policy.
ESKOM is due to face a legal challenge this year in a bid to stop it from applying targeted load reduction on numerous feeder lines across the country.
Sakeliga, in collaboration with Agri North-West, TLU SA and affected businesses, launched an application in the Gauteng High Court, Pretoria, against Eskom, for the court to review and set aside the utility’s load reduction policy.
Tian Alberts, of Sakeliga, said for more than a year Eskom has regularly, and for hours on end, been terminating the power supply of direct users on certain feeder lines in an apparent attempt to curb illegal usage and to collect debt. In the process, paying end-users – often businesses and farms – are also targeted.
Load reduction is implemented above and beyond national load shedding, and causes significant disruption to production processes and damage to equipment.
Sakeliga sent a letter to Eskom in August demanding an undertaking that illegal load reduction on identified feeder lines would cease. Eskom did not respond to the letter, and Sakeliga instructed its legal team to approach the court to have Eskom’s load reduction policy and its implementation declared illegal and unconstitutional. Agri North-West, TLU SA and an affected business are co-applicants in the matter.
Alberts said the Electricity Regulation Act provides for a form of load reduction, but this may never involve a complete cessation of electricity supply, only an appropriate reduction in load size.
“Load reduction may not be used as a debt collection mechanism,” he added.
“In the case of load reduction, it appears that Eskom does not have the ability or willingness to effectively address problems surrounding illegal usage and infrastructure upgrading. Load reduction is then instead implemented to target both illegal and legal direct end-users. This conduct is irrational and unfair,“ Alberts said.
He said it was unacceptable that paying end-users’ businesses and livelihoods should bear the brunt of negligence and deterioration at Eskom.
“On top of the instability and increased costs already occasioned by load shedding, those on targeted supply lines who dutifully settle their electricity bills every month are now further punished because Eskom does not maintain their infrastructure, and fails to remove illegal connections on supply lines.”
Sakeliga’s latest court case against Eskom aims to bring interim relief to many businesses and households.
The organisation said businesses and the public were in the grip of a man-made electricity crisis caused by the obstruction of private electricity supply, perpetrated by the state.
Alberts said in his affidavit filed with the court that the detriment of Eskom’s load reduction policy was exacerbated by the fact that it followed no proper notice or consultation processes before implementing this to areas where it had lost control of the administration and management of feeder lines.
“The policy of load reduction and its implementation raises important and fundamental constitutional and legislative issues. This is because direct customers are being penalised for the failure of the first respondent (Eskom) to properly audit and manage its distribution and reticulation networks across the country,” he said.
“Law-abiding citizens, direct consumers and end-users of electricity who diligently settle or attempt to settle their direct supply electricity accounts find themselves in the untenable situation that, notwithstanding compliance with their obligations, they are severely prejudiced and affected by a continued process of power cuts above and beyond national load shedding,” Alberts stated.
He said they were vulnerable to their statutory dependency on the provision of electricity by Eskom and thus had no choice but to turn to court for relief.
Pretoria News
