Read the full submission:
We act on behalf of the EMS Foundation (EMSF) (“our client”). Our client is a registered trust,nonprofit organisation and public benefit organisation, established in 2014. EMSF is committedto social and inclusive justice, compassion and the advancement and protection of the dignity,rights and general welfare of vulnerable and marginalised groups and individuals in South Africa,with particular focus on: youth at risk, the elderly and the conservation of wildlife.
2.This submission is made in response to the Notice published on 15 October 2024 by theDepartment of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment, inviting public comment in the form of“written scientific information” on non-detriment findings (”NDFs”) for certain species (“theNDF Notice”).1
3.These comments are fully endorsed by the Wildlife Animal Protection Forum of South Africa(WAPFSA), a coalition of thirty diverse South African-based organisations united by sharedvalues and objectives. WAPFSA collectively comprise a body of expertise across variousdisciplines, including scientific research, environmental protection, legal advocacy, animalwelfare, human rights, social justice, climate action, indigenous knowledge, and public policy.Collectively, WAPFSA represents the interests of South Africa’s wildlife and naturalenvironment, working to engage government on issues such as biodiversity conservation,animal protection, ethical conservation practices, and the impacts of climate change.
4.While our client welcomes the publication of NDFs as a tool to fulfil South Africa’s obligationsunder the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora(“CITES”), we submit that the Department’s current approach is procedurally, substantively andmethodologically deficient. Therefore, although the NDF Notice requires submissions in theform of “written scientific information,” our client bases its objections on broader legal,procedural and substantive issues. These submissions will therefore address:4.1. procedural flaws in the consultation process;
4.2. legal inadequacies in the development and implementation of NDFs under the NationalEnvironmental Management: Biodiversity Act, 2004 (“NEM:BA”);
4.3. methodological shortcomings in assessing species;
4.4. the lack of consideration of key legal principles, such as the precautionary approach; and
4.5. the failure to consider species well-being, as required under South African law.
Image Credit: ©EMS Foundation 2024.
©WAPFSA 2024. All Rights Reserved