Navitas Petroleum must not be allowed to export energy resources from South Africa to feed the corporate machinery of Israel’s genocide, ecocide, illegal occupation and apartheid. No profit can justify permanent ecological damage to our oceans and the livelihoods of our coastal communities.  In September 2026, South Africa granted offshore fossil fuel rights to an Israeli company, Navitas Petroleum. This is not an ordinary commercial transaction. This deal enables Apartheid Israel to benefit materially from activities within South Africa’s jurisdiction and territory that will cause irreversible harm to peoples, climate and nature.  Navitas Petroleum generates income for Apartheid Israel, Israeli investors and financial institutions. The exploration right relates to Block 1 CBK, which is situated within an ecologically and economically significant marine region in the Orange Basin on South Africa’s west coast, along its maritime border with Namibia. Any exploration or extraction would have devastating impacts on marine ecosystems, fisheries, coastal communities and livelihoods in both countries, and for climate-vulnerable communities globally.  Under international and domestic law, and as enshrined in its Constitution, South Africa has iron-clad obligations to ensure human rights and the protection of the environment, including the climate and marine systems. These obligations must be reflected in any decisions on national resources. National resources should not be in the hands of corporate actors whose material operations benefit regimes accused of crimes against humanity.  In allowing an Israeli company to profit from South Africa’s fossil fuel resources, South Africa is directly undermining its international and domestic legal obligations and moral standing on Palestinian liberation, human rights and environmental justice. South Africa’s legal and moral obligations to Palestine South Africa has a longstanding and principled stance that supports Palestinian liberation. South Africa has stated that normal relations cannot continue while Israel commits genocide and war crimes, removes Palestinians from their lands and perpetrates violations of  international law. These human rights violations are documented in detail in United Nations reports.  The International Court of Justice (ICJ) Advisory Opinion on Legal Consequences arising from the Policies and Practices of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem concluded in 2024 that Israel’s continued presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory is unlawful, and that all States are obliged to recognise unlawful occupation, and not to render aid or assistance in maintaining it.  South Africa is leading proceedings against Israel before the ICJ under the Genocide Convention. State Parties  to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide are bound to prevent genocide and refrain from complicity. Where a serious risk is known or ought reasonably to be known, States must exercise due diligence as well as exercise their capacity to influence and regulate private actors – including  leveraging their economic ties.  South Africa’s obligations to peoples and nature Under several human rights, climate and environmental treaties and agreements, South Africa is obligated to reduce and prevent transboundary and intergenerational environmental harm, including harm to the climate. In Sustaining the Wild Coast, the South African Constitutional Court reaffirmed the State’s obligation to protect the environment for present and future generations. The Court emphasised that financial and commercial interests cannot be placed above the rights of affected peoples. The Court also recognised the 2025 ICJ Advisory Opinion on Obligations of States in Respect of Climate Change, which determined that States are obligated to prevent significant environmental harm, to act with due diligence in accordance with the latest science, and to ensure that activities within their jurisdiction or control do not cause harm to the environment, including the climate system.  Why a thorough public participation process is necessary South Africa’s mineral and petroleum resources are administered by the State as custodian for the benefit of the nation. South African law recognises public participation as integral for decisions on fossil fuel exploration (PAJA, NEMA, and MPRDA).  In Sustaining the Wild Coast, the South African Constitutional Court emphasised the importance of adequate consultation to ensure that the concerns of affected peoples such as fisherfolk are considered, and that their agency and dignity is protected. Access to information is a key element of the right to public participation. Interested and affected parties must be properly informed and be able to participate in decision making. No information regarding this transfer has so far been made available from the South African government, as of mid October 2026.  Objection to the transfer of rights to Navitas In August 2026, human rights and environmental organisations wrote to Minister Mantashe and the Petroleum Agency of South Africa (PASA), advising that the transfer of rights to Navitas Petroleum should be denied. No response or acknowledgement was received. On 22 September 2026, it was made public by the companies involved that the rights had been granted. An application for critical information was submitted to PASA on 24 September 2026 under the Promotion of Access to Information Act (PAIA). As yet, no response has been received.  South Africa must end its complicity in Apartheid Israel’s war crimes and crimes against humanity - not form new long term commercial relationships that will be devastating for people and the planet.  Minister Mantashe must act urgently on civil society demands to stop Navitas Petroleum operating in South African waters.  Please email us for more information.  For more information and context, please watch this webinar:  Oil, Occupation & Extractivism - Why South Africa must repeal offshore oil and gas rights granted to Navitas.

1. Environmental impacts • Mining removes sand from beaches and dunes, destroying sensitive ecosystems. • These coastal areas protect inland communities from storms and rising sea levels, so their loss increases coastal erosion,making flooding and storm damage more likely. • Mining creates dust clouds causing sediment settlement in the rivers and the sea, making it muddy and blocking sunlight needed for aquatic life. This sediment also settles on sealife, such as shellfish, and suffocate them. • Mining processes release toxic chemicals, causing pollution, damage to underground water and possible health risks to people. • Noise and vibrations from heavy machinery, and shockwaves from blasting during open-cast mining affect people, animals and housing negatively, and in the case of marine life, can affect their very survival. 2. Impacts on Communities and Livelihoods • Fishing, which many coastal communities rely on, are negatively affected by mining. Damage to marine ecosystems reduces fish stocks and income for fishers. • Destruction of natural coastal areas can reduce tourism, farming, and other local business opportunities. • Mining projects can lead to conflict within communities, especially when people feel their rights are ignored. • Disputes often arise over land use and access to natural resources. • The removal of archeological and heritage materials, and family graves impact communities' human cultural rights and heritage. 3. Economic and Sustainability Concerns • There is NO urgent global shortage of "rare" earth minerals; they are found widely in the environment. • Coastal dune systems take thousands of years to form and cannot easily be restored once destroyed. These ecosystems also help store carbon, so their loss contributes to climate change. • Most financial benefits from mining go to large global companies. Local people often face negative impacts and an increased number of economic and social problems. This includes short-term unstable work, work related injuries, and high levels of violence and the loss of other traditional livelihoods through displacement.

South Africa’s mineral wealth continues to enrich corporations and elites while leaving mining affected communities in poverty, with broken ecosystems and unfulfilled promises[6].The ongoing MPRDA Amendment Bill offers Parliament a historic opportunity to correct this imbalance, to center justice , transparency and community participation in mining governace[8]. We believe Parliament must reaffirm its constitutional duty under Section 59(1)(a) , to facilitate public involvement in the legislative process, especially for communities most affected by extractive industries[9]. As MACUA, WAMUA, and YAMUA, together with our allies and supporters. We demand a mining future that puts people before profit, ensures gender equity, environmental protection, and accountability, and restores community control over land and resources.[7]. A call for Action : After signing, Please share this petition widely. Tag @ParliamentofRSA, @DMRE_ZA, and @GwedeMantashe1 to demand urgent action for mining affected communities. Parliament must listen to the people,  not mining companies! Sources / References: • MACUA, WAMUA, YAMUA. Petition to Parliament: Calling for Justice for Mining-Affected Communities (2025) • Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 – Sections 59, 195, and 24 • National Assembly Rules, Rule 347 (2024 revision) • Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act (MPRDA) and Amendment Bill (2025) • National Environmental Management Act (NEMA)

According to Pikitup, by this time next year, all four of its functioning landfills will be closed. Its solution? Pay R68 million in the 2025/25 year alone, to send the city’s waste to private landfills and enter public-private partnerships to build an incinerator and a mega landfill. This will put thousands of landfill reclaimers out of work, cause significant environmental harm, and leave the city drowning in its own waste.  As residents, we say no to opting for environmental and social injustice.  Pikitup and the City of Johannesburg created this crisis. The 2011 City of Johannesburg Integrated Waste Management Plan noted the looming closure of the city’s landfills and highlighted the urgent need for projects to increase the capacity of existing landfills, implement separation at source to divert recyclables from landfills, and build new landfills. Instead, it delayed projects to increase capacity at the landfills, took no action to build its own new landfills, and continues to pursue ineffective and expensive separation at source by cooperatives and private companies. No one wants a mega landfill beside their home. If Pikitup does find a place for a mega landfill, it will be far from where people live, increasing diesel costs and causing great environmental harm. The reclaimers who have worked so hard for many years to keep our landfills open cannot just be thrown away like trash.  Their organisation, ARO, has implemented highly effective, environmentally sustainable separation at source projects that do not require reclaimers to form cooperatives. A recent ARO reclaimer led 18-month programme, ending June 2025, indicates that 945 reclaimers in Johannesburg collected 46 000 tonnes of recyclables that have been successfully diverted from landfills. ARO has solutions to avoid the double social and environmental crisis that will result from Pikitup and the City’s plans. As such ARO demands Pikitup and the City if Johannesburg to: -              Have a participatory policy process including ARO, residents, and environmental experts to develop other sustainable solutions to avoid privatisation of landfills; -              Urgently implement projects to move the drainage pond at Marie Louise landfill and purchase adjacent land to extend its lifespan; -              Implement similar projects at all other landfills; -              Negotiate social plans for landfill reclaimers so that they can continue to salvage and sell residents’ recyclables through reclaimer-run separation at source programmes; -              Implement reclaimer-led separation at source across the city to reduce the need for new landfills; and -              Sign the formal partnership agreement with ARO that has been languishing at Pikitup Head Office for years.

ArcelorMittal South Africa is one of the largest steel producers in the world and among the oldest to have caused harm in communities near its large steel mill. Therefore, we expect them to address the harm they have caused and ensure that no further damage occurs to the communities they operate in after their exit. According to the National Environmental Management Act and other trade legislative frameworks, a plant of the industrial magnitude of AMSA plants in this case is required by law to exit properly, undergo rehabilitation, and carry out outstanding compensations, which will include proper compensation of workers and ensuring that they do not leave the communities they are in in industrial ruin[4]. VEJA is seeking public support to demand proper Exit Plans from ArcelorMittal SA, ensuring Restorative Justice at all costs. ArcelorMittal Group makes billions of dollars annually without supporting its operations in the Global South, even though it has invested in better technologies to meet international standards and comply with the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive. We call on the giant corporation to act voluntarily and adhere to international standards. If ArcelorMittal SA closes down, let them do so by the law. If enough of us sign this petition, we can put enough pressure on Arcelor Mittal to commit to publishing its exit plans. References 1. ArcelorMittal South Africa says on course to close long steel plants in September by Engineering News, 31 July 2025 https://www.engineeringnews.co.za/article/arcelormittal-south-africa-says-on-course-to-close-long-steel-plants-in-september-2025-07-31-1 2. Just Transition Framework by the Department of Treasury, https://pccommissionflo.imgix.net/uploads/images/22_PAPER_Framework-for-a-Just-Transition_revised_242.pdf 3. Activists push dirty steel giant ArcelorMittal SA to stop pollution and accelerate transition to green steel by Centre for Environmental Rights, 12 May 2022 https://cer.org.za/news/activists-push-dirty-steel-giant-arcelormittal-sa-to-stop-pollution-and-accelerate-transition-to-green-steel#:~:text=ArcelorMittal%20South%20Africa%20(AMSA)%20remains,finance%20even%20their%20mediocre%20commitments. 4. National Environmental Management Act https://www.gov.za/sites/default/files/gcis_document/201409/a107-98.pdf 

The unlawful exploitation of our natural heritage by foreign interests for short-term profit undermines our constitutional rights and jeopardises future generations. Furthermore, this project is built on the promise to deliver jobs for the community in the area, but we know that it is a lie. The economic fault lines upon which Makhado’s great arc and blast furnaces will be built run deep. A terrible price will be paid for any jobs created, as those jobs will not last. It is an environmental and economic disaster waiting to happen. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------End of open letter Your signature can help us stop the creation of a new sacrifice zone for coal and steel in Limpopo. Sign the open letter now! To further understand the gravity of the issue Carte Blanche has released this telling exposé. Watch here: https://youtu.be/CW_CanP31Mk

An organisation called Living Limpopo is working to challenge this mega project. They have launched an inquiry into the legal status of the North Site of the MMSEZ, and will continue to monitor the licensing of protected tree destruction at all sites of the SEZ and the planned new coal mines.  They opposed the approval of the Water Use License, the Township Establishment and are participating in the Environmental Impact Assessment process and emissions licence applications for the ferrochrome smelter, coal washery and coking plants at the MMSEZ South Site.  The judicial review case brought in December 2022 by Living Limpopo, CALS and others against the decision to grant environmental authorisation for site establishment at the South Site, is still pending. All Rise will be in an unopposed hearing in the Polokwane High Court on 6 December to finally determine issues relating to the record of decision Various farmers and indigenous communities are busy fighting this legislation. Our only duty as members of amandla.mobi is to give them the strength and support needed to advance this and protect tourism in Limpopo. Please add your name to the petition to protect our rich fauna and flora. We need to protect the ecology, biodiversity and heritage of areas in South Africa that are rich in these. References   [1] Mining permits threaten Limpopo's ecosystems and agriculture. FoodforMzansi, 29 November 2024. https://www.foodformzansi.co.za/mining-permits-threaten-limpopos-ecosystems-and-agriculture  [2] Thousands of Boabab trees are to be bulldozed in Limpopo by Barry Viljoen for The Citizen. 25 November 2024. https://www.citizen.co.za/network-news/lnn/article/thousands-of-baobab-trees-to-be-bulldozed-in-limpopo/ [3] Thirsty, energy-hungry steel 'monster' set to destroy thousands of Limpopo protected trees in industrial drive by Tony Carnie for the Daily Maverick. 14 November 2024. https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2024-11-14-thirsty-energy-hungry-steel-monster-set-to-destroy-thousands-of-limpopo-protected-trees-in-industrial-drive

The Double Standards Pesticides Campaign calls on the South African government to ban all HHPs that have already been banned in the EU. The Campaign is important because tens of thousands of South African farm workers are impacted by exposure to these HHPs as they are often forced to work in vineyards and orchards while pesticides are being sprayed, and without the necessary personal protective equipment (PPE). This has resulted in the health of many farm workers being adversely and irreversibly impacted, affecting their quality of life and ability to work.   South African farm workers and dwellers need your support to exert pressure on Minister Steenhuisen to ban all HHPs already banned in the EU, in order to protect their health and wellbeing. 

We have been promised the bridge for the past 20 years, but not having the bridge is affecting us as residents, children are unable to get to school when it rains they are forced to only return to school in May after the rainy season, which impacts their schooling. High school learners are even forced to rent places closer to the school just so they are able to attend classes [2] We can’t go to the clinic to get treatment, we can't go to town. It's worse when someone passes on, we are forced to carry the coffin for a very long distance because we can't cross that river it's too dangerous. The river has claimed many lives and the delays by the municipality continue to threaten us as the community of Noqgala [3], if you add your name to this petition you can help us get the municipality to hear our cries we are tired of being ignored, 20 years is a long time and we need clear plans and a timeline of when will the bridge be completed. References [1] https://groundup.org.za/article/r97-million-spent-and-three-years-later-still-no-bridge/ [2] https://www.dispatchlive.co.za/news/2023-06-19-r10m-and-two-years-but-villagers-still-without-bridge/#google_vignette [3] https://youtu.be/XoMGTfRhokU

• Building new coal plants will take years and be very expensive to build and maintain. This will drive up the cost of electricity for everyone even more.  • Renewable energy projects are cheaper, more sustainable and can be deployed quickly to meet our immediate electricity needs, while bringing electricity to communities who most need it.  • Those who live on the coal front are already suffering extreme health problems because of poor air quality around coal plants. Air pollution from coal-fired power stations kills more than 2,200 South Africans every year and causes thousands of cases of bronchitis and asthma in adults and children annually.  • People who work coal jobs are increasingly under threat of retrenchments and are also forced to work in very unhealthy environments. Future renewable energy and other green economy jobs can create even more opportunities for workers than future coal jobs – if planned carefully.  • Coal is a major contributor to climate change, driving extreme weather events that threaten our way of life. We have a responsibility to current and future generations to reduce emissions and embrace sustainable energy solutions. Sign on to Tell the Government to End New Coal for our Just Future !  About the Campaign!  The #CancelCoal campaign is a youth-led campaign by the African Climate Alliance, Vukani Environmental Movement, and groundWork. It calls for the end of new coal in South Africa and supports the landmark legal case of the same name, represented by the Centre for Environmental Rights.  The legal case is a constitutional challenge to the South African government’s plans to introduce 1500 MW of new coal-fired power electricity - the equivalent of three to four large power plants. We are asking the court to put a stop to the government’s call for the development of this new coal capacity. 

South Africans have until 31 July to say no to a Nuclear Installation Site Licence (NISL) application. Late last year we objected to the building of a new nuclear plant at Duynefontein near the existing Koeberg Nuclear Power Plant. Now Eskom has applied for yet another new site license for Thyspunt, located in the Eastern Cape, to the National Nuclear Regulator (NNR) Board. South Africa cannot afford and doesn't need [1] unsafe [2] and unnecessary nuclear power. Object to Eskom’s plans before it’s too late. Nuclear power is dangerous, unhealthy and costly. Nuclear plants – big or small – are very expensive to set up, often with cost overruns and construction delays. The cost of the decommissioning of these plants is also prohibitively costly. As history has taught us, new nuclear procurement is where large scale corruption can, and has, taken place. In this instance, little to no information has been provided to the public on the cost and feasibility of new nuclear energy. Transparency is needed to build back public trust after past illegal and unconstitutional nuclear deals. Nuclear power is not needed for our energy grid now or in the future. Especially during the Covid-19 crisis, we should not be looking at procurement of one of the most expensive forms of energy. The most recent Energy plan, IRP 2019, does not show the necessity for the procurement of nuclear energy. Also no-one can guarantee 100% safety with nuclear energy. Radiation and radioactive waste created at nuclear power stations are extremely toxic. More nuclear power could put the health of workers – most-likely younger people – and communities close to the plants at risk. Consider what Electrical Engineer Hilton Trollip points out, “We absolutely do not need Koeberg to avoid load shedding. There are documented and proven sustainable electric systems that can run very well without nuclear and even without coal.” We should instead move toward a just energy transition, investing in and supporting renewable energy sources. Not only is RE able to create a more inclusive energy landscape – giving formerly-excluded communities more of a chance to be part of the economy – the risks associated with RE are significantly less. References: https://ewn.co.za/2017/04/26/western-cape-high-court-rules-sa-nuclear-deal-unlawful-and-unconstitutional https://theconversation.com/why-decommissioning-south-africas-koeberg-nuclear-plant-wont-be-easy-89888#:~:text=The%20potential%20cost%20of%20decommissioning,UK%20model%20at%20R76%20billion https://www.iol.co.za/news/south-africa/western-cape/safety-concerns-over-koeberg-nuclear-plant-as-cape-town-tremors-grow-in-intensity-74d7b088-2840-41ee-a8a7-a40fa83451ee

Starting from 1 July, residents living in houses worth more than R350 000 could potentially pay a R50 “recycling fee” if the City of Johannesburg’s proposed waste management tariff is approved. The City said that the R50 additional levy will go to Pikitup to extend a separation at source (S@S) programme which has already been piloted in a few suburbs in Johannesburg. The City places the bill at the feet of “affluent” residents to extend the S@S pilot programme yet provides no research or statistics to support it. Residents are expected to buy into a system they know nothing about despite having very little trust in the government to provide services and use the money for its intended purpose. Not only does this recycling fee raise more questions and concerns for residents, it is a grave threat to the livelihood of reclaimers who depend on the collection of recyclables for their daily living. The extension of this project will decrease reclaimers’ access to bins which will significantly decrease their income. Reclaimers collect between 80 - 90 % of used packaging collected for recycling, saving municipalities millions of rands per year. The contribution of reclaimers cannot be overlooked or underestimated. There are alternatives to the City's proposal. As African Reclaimers Organisation (ARO), we have been piloting our own S@S programme, where we work directly with residents in Brixton and Auckland Park who separate materials for us. Instead of destroying our jobs, Pikitup should expand our pilot across the city. We call on residents to: 1. Sign this petition to stop the recycling fee and protect reclaimers’ jobs 2. Object to the recycling fee by completing this IDP comment form: https://share.hsforms.com/1xa2Cg-qnRxajkHAoDwsivw469tl (deadline is 8 May 2021) 3. Get in contact with ARO on Facebook/ Instagram or email to see how we can develop a resident-reclaimer S@S programme in your area No recycling without reclaimers! Social media: @africanreclaimers Email: [email protected]