Energy apartheid: Mining companies transition without justice
The
Delving deeper, the study found that the explosion of household solar energy was only benefiting a white minority: the solar panel area per household was a staggering 73 times higher in white rather than in black areas.
Despite the central role played by the mining sector in the dispossession, exploitation and discrimination of communities under colonialism and apartheid, mining houses such as
As has been documented
According to its Integrated Development Plan, the local Fetakgomo Tubatse municipality hosts an estimated 41 mining operations. Yet, the
Recently Anglo American Platinum joined the increasing numbers of
It does not have to be this way. Anglo American Platinum's successor, like all mining companies, is legally required to invest in the development of host communities under the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act through social and labour plan (SLP) projects. An ever-growing pile of reports by the
Valterra and other mining houses have an opportunity to develop SLP infrastructure and income generating projects of a suitable scale, ambition and rigour to rectify this. In this effort to reimagine the SLP, they could draw upon the ideas of local community organisations such as Sekhukhune Combined Mining Affected Communities (SCMAC). The SCMAC has, for several years, called on Anglo Platinum to equip communities to be able to generate electricity to sell to Twickenham and other mines.
The SCMAC has been proactive to the extent of enlisting partners such as 350 Africa, CALS and Ahinasa to research the needs of villages and produce a
Anglo American Platinum has, however, repeatedly failed to offer any concrete support even in the form of pilot projects and feasibility studies. Both company representatives and mine management were conspicuously absent at two events connected to a newly published research report making the case for Anglo's support notwithstanding invitations and prior engagements by the SCMAC.
Valtera might respond that there is limited funding available because Twickenham generates no revenue being in care and maintenance. This does not hold water as Valterra is a vast revenue-generating group of companies and its decision to keep Twickenham non-operational for more than 10 years necessitates more social expenditure to be making a meaningful contribution to economic development of the area.
They might also argue that as just one company they cannot solely be responsible for addressing systemic problems and can only play a supplementary role to the government. But this assumes that they have done everything they can possibly do.
Have they?
In 2024, Anglo American Platinum generated nearly
Anglo American Platinum (in its new guise as Valterra Platinum) and other mining companies therefore have a choice: perpetuate energy apartheid or make good on their commitment to contribute towards a just transition worthy of its name.
Robert Krause is the acting head of Environmental Justice at the Centre for Applied Legal Studies, Wits University
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mail & Guardian
an hour ago
- Mail & Guardian
Young people don't relate to traditional news sources
There is nothing inherently magical about a newspaper. Socially, sure, the beautiful thing about a physical copy is that it can be shared, passed around and collectively leafed through. But that's not what makes it great. South Africa's youngest news consumers are disengaging from traditional journalism. South Africa's youngest news consumers are disengaging from traditional journalism. Instead, they rely on digital platforms that prioritise speed, user choice and algorithmic influence, often at the expense of credibility and sustained attention. According to the The result is a growing disconnect between young audiences and traditional media outlets. Many young people favour content that feels personal and direct, fuelling a global move toward personality-driven journalism. Influencers and independent creators often receive greater engagement than established news outlets. 'The myth is that young people don't consume media [and] news or read a lot. The reality is that they do, but have a different view of what, how and where they should find and consume it,' said Anton Harber, author and former professor at the University of the Witwatersrand and of the Mail & Guardian. Young people consume considerable amounts of media, but their consumption patterns differ from older generations, Harber explained. Journalists are struggling to connect with them on the platforms and through the formats they prefer. 'There is a disconnect between journalists and young audiences, largely being filled by influencers and chancers who often pretend to be doing journalism but have none of the verification processes, rules and ethics of journalism.' Digital platforms have introduced speed and reach, breaking down the traditional gatekeepers of information. This has expanded access to news, but it has also blurred the lines between credible reporting and unverified content. 'We are flooded by a rich mix of information and disinformation. We have less quality, in-depth, probing journalism and less capacity to know what is true or fake,' Harber said. South Africa reflects the global anxiety over misinformation. In its 2025 report, the Reuters Institute notes that 73% of South Africans are concerned about their ability to discern real from fake information online. This is on par with the United States and Nigeria, but well above the global average of 58%. In addition, the report shows that 55% of South Africans trust the news most of the time, placing the country fifth out of the 48 surveyed. This indicates that trust in news remains relatively strong, but it is steadily declining from the 61% recorded in 2022. 'There has been a deliberate campaign to undermine trust in traditional media for malicious and disruptive purposes, often by governments and organisations attempting to undermine democracy by flooding the zone with disinformation,' Harber said. Mistrust has been amplified by social media algorithms that prioritise aggravating content. Rather than offering clarity, these platforms contribute to information fatigue and deepen public scepticism. 'Social media has facilitated this by using algorithms that favour information that is disruptive, conflictual and anxiety-inducing.' Despite Harber's concerns about the structural risks of algorithmic media, the fast-paced and personalised nature of social media platforms continues to appeal to many young South Africans. Farhana Essop, a law and politics student, said she receives most of her news on Instagram. She explained that she is interested in current affairs but finds traditional forms of news outdated and 'unengaging'. Essop also believes that some newsrooms contain biases, which become embedded into the news published for public consumption. For her, social media is a reliable alternative because it can provide diverse perspectives and first-hand accounts of situations. 'There's a lot of people who are dedicated to giving you both sides and showing you what's actually happening,' she said. Despite the risk of misinformation online, Essop believes the interactive nature of social media provides more context and clarity than traditional media. For Sydney, a psychology student, the constant stream of information — however accessible — can be overwhelming. She believes that staying informed is important, but not at the expense of mental wellbeing. 'You need to be knowledgeable to some extent about what's going on. There are real problems. We need to be aware of that. But when it gets to a point where it affects your mental health and it affects how you perceive certain things — or it clashes with your views — you can distance yourself from it,' she said. Sydney believes that reporting on sensitive topics objectively can underplay the experiences of those affected. This can unintentionally distance readers from the story. 'A lot of [journalists] target very personal and intimate topics from an objective point of view, and some things can't be looked at objectively. When you don't regard the human aspect of [news], it becomes very impersonal.' Shiloh Marsh, a third-year media student, believes the way news is delivered plays a crucial role in how young people engage with it. Marsh receives news from multiple sources, including Eyewitness New s, public broadcaster SABC as well as The Sun and The Citizen . To reconnect with young people, Marsh thinks media houses should employ young reporters and news anchors. 'It's very much the same people that you saw from 20 years ago. We need new faces to interest us.' Marsh says news should be kept easy to understand, and argues that some journalists ask interviewees over-complicated questions and write in jargon that makes news inaccessible for young people. 'I think there's a huge gap between how the news is told versus how young people interpret it,' she said. The challenge lies in the media's resistance to change, Harber contends. Newsrooms must move beyond rigid, formulaic practices and adopt storytelling formats that reflect how young audiences connect with information today. To rebuild trust and remain relevant, journalism must embrace approaches that prioritise transparency and conversation. 'The research shows that young people want to see the faces of those bringing them information [to] identify with them and — most of all — they must be authentic. [Young people] want conversations, not lectures,' he added.
TimesLIVE
2 hours ago
- TimesLIVE
Brics would end quickly if they 'ever form in meaningful way': Trump
US President Donald Trump on Friday repeated his threat to slap a 10% tariff on imports from members of the Brics group of developing nations and said the group would end very quickly if they ever formed in a meaningful way. 'When I heard about this group from Brics — six countries, basically — I hit them very, very hard. And if they ever really form in a meaningful way, it will end very quickly,' Trump said without naming the countries. 'We can never let anyone play games with us.' Trump also said he was committed to preserving the dollar's global status as a reserve currency and pledged to never allow the creation of a central bank digital currency in America. Trump announced the new tariff on July 6, saying it would apply to any countries aligning themselves with what he called the 'Anti-American policies' of the Brics group. With forums such as the G7 and G20 groups of major economies hamstrung by divisions and the disruptive 'America First' approach of the US president, the Brics group is presenting itself as a haven for multilateral diplomacy.
Mail & Guardian
4 hours ago
- Mail & Guardian
Open letter to Paula Slier
Paula Slier. (Wikipedia) Dear Ms Paula Slier, I have observed with a degree of bemusement your recent forays into the blogosphere of the Times of Israel. Having followed your international career, and even encountered your work on the local airwaves of Chai FM here in Johannesburg, I must confess to a certain level of disappointment at the spectacle that has unfolded. On 11 July 2025, you saw fit to amplify the extreme, dangerous and unsubstantiated assertions of one Justin Lewis. A mere two days later, you claim that this is 'a lobbying and advocacy effort based on unverified allegations'. But, instead of apologising to your readers for violating the most basic tenets of ethical journalism and taking steps to mitigate the damage you have caused, you chose once again to amplify these reckless allegations, vowing to pursue them, notwithstanding the lack of evidence. For the record, to say that these claims are unverified and baseless is a perfectly rational response to someone, like Mr Lewis, who clearly has a penchant for misinformation and lies. What is not rational is to ignore a growing body of evidence and information from experts in search of nonexistent evidence that South Africa could not have possibly conceived on its own the interpretation of upholding international law by invoking the provisions of the genocide convention. Just by way of desktop research you would have found this LinkedIn Post , which also has similar sensational claims about the first minister of Scotland. The 'information' you are referring to is an email to the an organisation referred to as the Media Research Council (MRC) in which, Mr Lewis commenced his missive with a litany of the following pronouncements: 'As a 'non-lawyer (I am a farmer by profession, entrepreneur by trade, and consultant to African health development projects in East Africa).' 'Some years ago Lloyds London and I were victims of court sanctioned insurance fraud in SA courts. During which time I worked with Chief Justice Chaskalson to Mogoeng Mogoeng. And the Leveson Inquiry, given the use of phone hacking to corrupt courts, which made Prince Harry's victory special.' 'I am a COE congregant who was privileged to consider the late Archbishop Desmond Tutu as a family friend, given our families long history with the Church.'' He then proceeded to tell the MRC: 'Evidence exists confirming that the SA government, led at that time by its main political party the African National Congress (ANC) knew about Hamas's sic) intended attack on the state of Israel before it happened in [sic] October 2023 and that elements within the SA government, the Department of Foreign Affairs (Dirco) (sic), actively encouraged and enjoined [sic] its support of Hamas political strategy by acting as its agent for access to the ICC and the ICJ, which access to the court (ICJ), Hamas did not have as a non-signatory, as alleged. 'As part of a political strategy, preparations were made prior to the 7 October atrocity against Israel, to put in place mechanisms to approach the ICC and ICJ for protection from the state of Israel's anticipated response. As a layman the example I use is that of assisting a neighbour to burn his house down, then rushing to court to claim insurance protection from your insurer (as your neighbour is a non-signatory).' One might reasonably be surprised that a mere email from a third party, clearly well-versed in the art of name-dropping luminaries — some, like Archbishop Desmond Tutu and former Chief Justice Arthur Chaskalson, no longer with us, alongside the rather incongruous mention of British royalty and former Chief Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng — could trigger a media inquiry. My own rudimentary desktop research swiftly illuminated the gaping holes in Mr Lewis' narrative and credibility: The Leveson Inquiry was an event of seismic proportions, meticulously documented and still debated in the UK. Yet, Mr Lewis' supposed involvement remains conspicuously absent from any credible record. Mr Lewis styles himself a 'non-lawyer' yet claims to have 'worked with two chief justices' of our Republic. In what capacity? South African judges, by the very nature of our judicial system, do not conduct investigations, let alone work with members of the public directly on legal matters. His reference to a Lloyds of London case in our courts, supposedly 'precedent-setting', eludes all recollection, despite its globally recognised status. Furthermore, 'court sanctioned insurance fraud' is oxymoronic: one cannot be the victim of a 'court sanctioned' crime, if the court dismissed the claim it determined it was not a crime. In 2014: 'Lewis says Casisa is a private sector human rights lobby made up of victims of fraud committed upon the court. It has not yet been registered as a human rights organisation in the European Union.' But he made submissions to parliament claiming to be an NGO. In 2017: he stated, 'My name is Justin Lewis and I am a human rights lobbyist for a NGO in the process of being registered whose purpose is the defence of SA national institutions from corruption.' My response to the Independent Online was that it was regrettable they (Independent Online) would lend credence to such unsubstantiated, baseless and reckless claims from an unknown and unverified individual. The case of the unverified claims Your July 11 blog entry in the Times of Israel regrettably mirrored this precise misstep, granting oxygen to demonstrably unverified assertions. You further compounded the error by endorsing Mr Lewis's contention that the South African media had, in some grand conspiracy, ignored his 'information'. In doing so, you effectively impugned the integrity of our media as a whole, suggesting it functions as a purveyor of misinformation or propaganda. The consequence was the discrediting of the South African media by both yourself and Mr Lewis. Mercifully, as you concede, 'industry colleagues' swiftly disabused you of the notion that you were pioneering in platforming an individual with a demonstrated propensity for manufacturing fictional narratives, a propensity, I might add, easily discernible with the most elementary of desktop searches. As you presumably easily discovered, hence your 'clarification' a mere two days after publication. One might ask whether you undertook an elementary search of Mr Lewis before publishing your 11 July blog that relied entirely on his unsubstantiated claims. There is simply no good answer to that question for you, as a journalist, is no doubt ostensibly committed to 'verified facts, credible sources, and balanced reporting'. A 'clarification' that only deepened the mire Upon realising the substantial credibility deficit of your source, you penned a damage-control 'clarification' on the very same Times of Israel blog. Here, you concede that your source and previous claims were, to be precise, baseless and unverified. One might have commended this acknowledgment of error, had it been accompanied by a modicum of self-reflection and contrition a recognition, perhaps, that a few swift Google searches might have spared you considerable embarrassment. Yet, astonishingly, you insist on the existence of 'global concerns' about 'South Africa's diplomatic posture toward Hamas and Iran'. 'Global concerns'? How many of the 193 United Nations member states have articulated such concern? I pause here to underscore that those who critique South Africa's bilateral relations with Iran seldom acknowledge that these relations, much like those with the State of Israel, predate our democratic government. It is, perhaps, convenient for some to portray these ties as a post-1994 phenomenon. I do, however, commend the discerning readers who promptly alerted you, Ms Slier, to the dubious nature of your July 11 blog post. Strangely, you appear to believe that the 'positive responses' you received somehow negate this. This raises a crucial question: why would one celebrate positive responses to unverified reporting? Again, in your July 13 entry, you seem to admit that, upon some semblance of verification on your part, the claims in your initial blog post cannot be substantiated. For instance, there is no application before any court that contains Mr Lewis' spectacular fables. Nonetheless, you doggedly insist this is an 'important lobby mechanism' and therefore you stand by your story. Essentially, we are to believe Mr Lewis simply because he said so, even in the face of unverified claims. The public deserves better It is fair to say that no serious person, let alone a journalist worth their salt, would publicly champion such a flimsy argument. The world, the readers of the Times of Israel and the listeners of Chai FM are profoundly ill-served by your work, Ms Slier. There are, in fact, credible voices who have cited South Africa's case before the International Court of Justice as providing compelling evidence of genocide in Gaza (including the court itself, on three separate occasions). One such voice is Israeli Dr Bartov, a professor of Holocaust and genocide studies at Brown University, in the venerable New York Times. He wrote: 'It appeared no longer possible to deny that the pattern of [Israel Defense Force] operations was consistent with the statements denoting genocidal intent made by Israeli leaders in the days after the Hamas attack,' including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's threat to turn Gaza into 'rubble' and his call for Israeli citizens to remember 'what Amalek did to you' — a reference to the biblical passage calling on the Israelites to 'kill alike men and women, infants and sucklings' in their fight against an ancient enemy. The continued denial of this designation by states, international organisations and legal and scholarly experts will cause unmitigated damage not just to the people of Gaza and Israel but also to the system of international law established in the wake of the horrors of the Holocaust, designed to prevent such atrocities from happening ever again.' South Africa's case has nothing to do with politics, nor with religion or ethnicity. It is about the conduct of a state that has signed the UN Charter, the Genocide Convention and numerous international instruments and manifestly and repeatedly violated them. It is about the equal application of international law. Our support for the right of self-determination of the Palestinian people is predicated on the enduring need to address the manifestation of an illegal settler colonial occupation. These instruments did not exist when the Herero people in Namibia were almost exterminated, or during the horrific period of the Holocaust. They existed in 1994 in Rwanda and Srebrenica, yet too few states pulled the levers put in place to stop them. Surely, we have learned from the lessons of the past and have vowed 'never again' to allow such atrocities to repeat. Surely, we cannot sit by and allow the logic that justified apartheid and previous tragedies to repeat themselves. South Africa has consistently called for an immediate ceasefire and a just peace, as well as for the return of all hostages held in captivity in Gaza and political prisoners — including children — who are incarcerated in Israeli prisons for advocating for the right of self-determination of the Palestinian people. This is what we must all be lobbying for: for the occupation to end and for the status quo to change for the better for the people of Israel and Palestine, not for unsubstantiated conspiracies propelled by name-droppers. By the way, in his email to the MRC, Mr Lewis inserts in 'his draft application' the following proviso: 'Subject to confirmation by our investigation whether SA President Ramaphosa knew about the alleged collaboration with an organisation the US, UK and the EU, a proclaimed terrorist organisation, or not.' Yes, you have read correctly: this from the very same person who declared there was 'evidence'. The world, the readers of the Times of Israel, and the listeners of Chai FM deserve better, Ms. Slier. We cannot accept clickbait, biased reporting that confirms unsubstantiated hogwash. As we mark Mandela month across the world, it may be prudent to remember what he said: 'But we know too well that our freedom is incomplete without the freedom of the Palestinians.' Indeed we cannot be free without the resolution of conflicts, including in Sudan and other parts of the world. Yours in verification and truth telling, Chrispin Phiri, spokesperson for the ministry of international relations and cooperation.
