Concluding arguments were heard in the Western Cape High Court today in the case of EarthLife Africa and the Southern African Faith Communities’ Environment Institute wanting the nuclear deal between South Africa and Russia to be declared unconstitutional because the matter was not brought before Parliament.

In the final day of arguments Marius Oosthuizen‚ representing the president and the minister of energy‚ said agreements of co-operation between two governments were typical examples of an executive nature.

Judge Elizabeth Baartman said the nuclear issue was of public and political interest‚ because the word nuclear was used from the word go.

Oosthuizen told the court that the deal had not been rushed and that the Minister Tina Joemat-Pettersson was considering all her options regarding the use of nuclear.

“A remedy for this matter is for Parliament to hold the relevant parties to account and that this matter does not warrant a judicial remedy but a political accountability remedy‚” said Oosthuizen.

Nuke treaty with Russia has nothing to do with domestic courts‚ argues state lawyerCourt is the wrong place to argue about the government’s alleged R1-trillion nuclear deal with Russia‚ government lawyers argued on Thursday. 

Judge Lee Bozalek asked how this deal can be remedied if it has been a highly secretive process from the start.

Oosthuizen responded‚ saying it was reported in the media.

He said one cannot be reliant on one source of electricity only.

“Internationally‚ they are talking about the race for energy. Fossil fuel will run out. By getting the right mix you will ensure uninterrupted electricity supply. Electricity supply is of national importance — that’s why this minister was given this power. We aren’t talking about Mickey Mouse operations” says Oosthuizen.

According to Oosthuizen‚ renewable energy (solar and wind) isn’t always available.

“The peaceful use of nuclear started 66 years ago. The world has known nuclear power for 66 years. We have Koeberg power station for 33 years now incident free‚” he argued.

In his closing argument‚ Adrian Pole‚ the lawyer for the applicants‚ said that if the nuclear deal goes through it will have a huge impact on the country’s budget and the environment.

“This is not an internal decision on when to hold the Christmas party; it is a far-reaching decision.”

Pole argued that it was unlikely that the national energy regulator‚ Nersa‚ was not influenced by the Department of Energy‚ which approves its budget.

“Nersa is the creature of the minister‚ who funds Nersa’s activity. Is it a matter where Nersa is following the tune of its paymaster?” asked Pole.

He argued that the nuclear deal should have been brought before Parliament to debate and discuss.

Pole again referred to the fact that Russia can veto the inclusion of a third country in the deal‚ which‚ according to Pole‚ could also have far-reaching consequences.

“This deal makes South Africa the operator irrespective of who constructs the nuclear plant; this means that South Africa will carry the liability of that of an operator.”

The deal means South Africa will carry all risks and costs that may arise in and outside of the country‚ he explained. This risk includes the transport of nuclear reactor technology from Russia; if something were to go wrong en route to South Africa‚ the country will carry the financial burden.

The Western Cape High Court will reconvene once the judges reached a verdict.