- Environmental cases are often delayed in ordinary courts, allowing pollution to continue and limiting access to justice.
- Specialised environmental courts would provide expert judicial oversight, faster decisions and stronger enforcement of environmental laws.
- Lessons from South Africa and other African countries show that dedicated environmental courts can improve conviction rates and protect affected communities.
A 2022 survey by research network Afrobarometer found that 70% of South Africans view pollution as a serious problem in their community.
Given the low conviction rate for environmental crimes, specialised environmental courts are needed for faster, expert handling of environmental cases, improved access to justice for underprivileged communities and stronger enforcement of environmental laws.
Living conditions and environmental health are interlinked: poor socio-economic conditions contribute to environmental harm, while an unhealthy environment worsens poverty, social inequality and public health. South Africa recognises this connection in its Constitution, which guarantees everyone the right to an environment that isn’t harmful to their health or well-being.
The country has strong environmental laws to support this right – the problem is enforcement. Environmental cases are handled by ordinary courts that are already overwhelmed with criminal and civil matters.
As a result, environmental disputes are often delayed or sidelined, with serious consequences. One case involved air and waste pollution in Ekurhuleni, Gauteng, where it took the court 19 months to issue an order to stop the pollution. By this time, communities had already suffered prolonged harm. Conviction rates for environmental crimes are also low, showing that current systems are not working effectively.
Why specialised environmental courts matter
This is where a specialised environmental court (SEC) plays a vital role. Unlike general courts, SECs focus only on environmental matters. Judges develop expertise in environmental law, science, and the balance between development, health and ecological protection. This leads to faster decisions, more consistent judgments and stronger protection for affected communities.
Evidence is found in the success of the now-defunct Hermanus Environmental Court, where conviction rates reportedly reached between 80% and 85% within its first 30 months. This illustrates how focused judicial attention and specialised expertise can significantly improve enforcement outcomes when environmental cases are not subsumed within congested court systems.
Other countries have shown that specialised courts can improve environmental justice. Kenya’s Environment and Land Court, for example, helped secure compensation and an environmental clean-up for a community poisoned by lead contamination. While not perfect, such courts improve access to justice and strengthen accountability.
A practical model for South Africa
Embedding a "green" court within South Africa’s High Court system offers a practical, cost-effective option for the country. It would make use of the courts already in place while giving judges the space to build real expertise in environmental matters over time.
These courts must be protected by law so that they are permanent and well resourced, and not easily shut down or dismantled, as has happened with environmental courts in the past. Doing so would strengthen environmental justice, protect vulnerable communities and give real meaning to South African citizens’ constitutional right to a healthy environment.
The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Conviction.co.za or the University of Pretoria.
Get your news on the go. Click here to follow the Conviction WhatsApp channel.
