[3] This case must also be understood against the backdrop of well documented struggles by coastal communities to protect their land, marine resources and ways of life in the face of extractive activities that they believe threaten their very existence. The sea is of deep importance to coastal communities along the Wild Coast. To quote from the founding affidavit in the High Court:
“Our land and sea are central to our livelihoods and our way of life. Over generations we have conserved them, and they have conserved us. This is not merely a matter of nutrition and income, though it certainly is that. Some of our ancestors reside in the sea, and our traditional healers and pastors use the sea to heal us and to connect us with God.”
[4] In areas such as Xolobeni, communities have for many years resisted proposed mining activities in order to preserve their environment, livelihoods and cultural practices. Similarly, in the Dwesa-Cwebe region, our courts have recognised that access to marine resources is not merely an economic concern but is intimately bound to customary practices and cultural identity.
[1] Their resistance to extractive activities and battles to be recognised have not been without cost. It has, at times, been marked by threats to the safety and security of those involved. These histories reflect that environmental governance in coastal areas is often marked by deep contestation, in which the protection of ecological systems is inseparable from the protection of the rights to dignity, culture and livelihood.