While the Gauteng High Court, Pretoria, has ruled that load shedding constituted an infringement of constitutional rights and gave the minister of Public Enterprises 60 days to implement a plan to exempt all government hospitals, clinics, schools and police stations from the power cuts, questions have been raised about how feasible the judgment is.
WHILE the Gauteng High Court, Pretoria, has ruled that load shedding constituted an infringement of constitutional rights and gave the minister of Public Enterprises 60 days to implement a plan to exempt all government hospitals, clinics, schools and police stations from the power cuts, questions have been raised about how feasible the judgment is.
This followed an application by the UDM and other political and civic organisations, which argued that the government and power utility Eskom had violated basic human rights by implementing load shedding that had impacted critical areas, such as hospitals.
The case, in which the parties were represented by advocate Tembeka Ngcukaitobi against the Department of Public Enterprises, resulted in an order being granted on Friday exempting certain sectors from ongoing load shedding to ensure the continuation of basic services.
However, concerns have been raised that to implement the decision, customers of the power utility would have to make up for the supply shortfall by being shed more frequently.
The court drew up its order broadly and left it in the hands of Public Enterprises Minister Pravin Gordhan to decide how he is going to remedy the situation.
Judge Norman Davis, responding on behalf of a full Bench, said Eskom’s submission that some public institutions were so embedded in a surrounding power network that exempting them would mean exempting a whole suburb or town meant the minister would have to make alternative plans.
“Individual solutions therefore need to be devised in instances where the DPE minister cannot secure exemptions, such as the provision of generators or alternate energy supplies.”
Presidency spokesperson Vincent Magwenya said that an appeal was likely.
Energy expert Ruse Moleshe said the judgment was not practical as there were schools, hospitals and police stations in almost every neighbourhood.
“They cannot be isolated because they are embedded in medium voltage grids and municipal networks throughout the country. To implement this decision other customers would have to make up for that supply shortfall or be shed more frequently than is the case currently.”
Moleshe said the costs and budgetary issues of buying diesel generators, diesel and installing the equipment at all these facilities were likely to be high.
“The timeline from a National Treasury budgetary cycle perspective is not practical. None of the solutions are financially sustainable.
“The solutions should be geared towards a longer term and more sustainable solution, including increasing infrastructure and generation capacity and using electricity more efficiently.”
UDM leader Bantu Holomisa said the court order compelled the government to do something about the energy crisis.
Build One South Africa Movement leader Mmusi Maimane said the government used load shedding as a convenient way to reject its obligations.
“This is why we went to court as the government says it has to load shed otherwise there will be a complete grid loss. Now there is no excuse as they have to come up with alternative plans in 60 days.”
The IFP said it was delighted that the court had ordered Gordhan to take all reasonable steps within 60 days to ensure that there should be sufficient supply or generation of electricity.
