Structural Interdictics for Environmental Rights Violations? South African Human Rights Commission v Msunduzi Local Municipality (8407/2020P) [2021] ZAKZPHC 35 (17 June 2021)*

The environmental right, as provided in section 24 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 (Constitution), read with section 7(2), places a positive duty upon all three government spheres to realise this right. This duty thus also befalls every municipality in the country. From time to time this right is adjudicated in the context of municipal governance. This note is premised on the judgment handed down in the case South African Human Rights Commission v Msunduzi Local Municipality (8407/2020P) [2021] ZAKZPHC 35 (17 June 2021). In this case the court found the Msunduzi Local Municipality to have breached section 24 of the Constitution and related legislative provisions. In addition to the declaratory order granted against the Msunduzi Local Municipality, the court further ordered a structural interdict as a way to enforce compliance on the part of the Municipality. Against this backdrop this paper examines the use of a structural interdict as a remedy to achieve judicial enforcement when municipalities breach constitutional and statutory environmental law. The meaning and relevance of the structural interdict in relation to local government are discussed with reference to the South African judiciary's historical application of structural relief in some of the most prominent socio-economic rights cases.