dc.description.abstract | In Baleni v Minister of Mineral Resources 2019 2 SA 453 (GP)
the court, duly following the judicial guidance provided in Maledu
v Itereleng Bakgatla Mineral Resources 2019 2 SA 1 (CC), made
an important pronouncement on the rights of people who hold
informal land tenure. The question in the Baleni judgment
concerned the level of consent required to obtain a mining right
over property held by a community with informal or customary
land tenure. The court specifically considered provisions of the
Interim Protection of Informal Land Rights Act 31 of 1996
(IPILRA) and the Mineral and Petroleum Resources
Development Act 28 of 2002 (MPRDA), and concluded that the
provisions of these Acts should be read together when
determining the level of consent required. The court found that
a community's consent, as required by IPILRA, and not merely
consultation with a community, as required by the MPRDA, is
necessary before a mining right can be obtained over a
community's property. The Baleni and the Maledu judgments set
an important judicial precedent protecting informal land owners
against the potentially harmful effects of mining activities, and
establish a higher standard for obtaining a mining right over such
property. However, despite the success of the judgment, many
questions remain regarding the longevity of IPILRA, in particular,
and a long-term solution to informal land tenure and land
security in general. This case note argues that final legislation
should be enacted to provide protection for people who hold
informal land rights, and consequently to formalise indigenous
communities' land rights to ensure that these judgments act as
the precursor for fundamental change in the current debate
regarding informal land rights. | en_US |