2024
ASSIGNMENT 1
SEMESTER 2
[Type the author name]
[ LEGAL ASPECTS OF
ENVIRONMENTAL
MANAGEMENT LEG2601 ]
LEG2601 Semester 2 2024 2 Department of Public, International Law This letter contains Constitutional
and the first assignment question for your module.Assignment 1 Semester 2024 2 Department of Public,
International Law This letter contains Constitutional and the first assignment question for your
module.DUE DATE: 06 September 2024 at 23:00 – no extensions will be granted!
, Question:
Examine the differences between the right to access courts (Locus Standi) as
outlined in section 38 of the Constitution and section 32 of the National
Environmental Management Act. In your response, explore the importance of
broadening legal standing in environmental issues.
Total: 20 Marks
Essays
### The Right to Access Courts: A Comparative Analysis of Locus Standi in the
Constitution and NEMA
Access to courts is a fundamental element of a democratic society, enabling
individuals to seek justice and enforce their rights. Within the South African legal
framework, locus standi—or the right to appear in court—serves as a critical
gateway to accessing justice. Two significant legislative provisions outline this
right: Section 38 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, and
Section 32 of the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA) of 1998.
While both provisions aim to facilitate legal standing, they differ in their
application and implications, particularly concerning environmental issues. This
essay will examine the differences between these two sections and highlight the
importance of broadening legal standing in addressing environmental challenges.
#### Locus Standi under the Constitution
Section 38 of the South African Constitution establishes a broad approach to locus
standi. It empowers individuals and groups to approach the courts if they believe
that a fundamental right, outlined in the Bill of Rights, has been infringed or
threatened. Importantly, it allows not only individuals but also "anyone acting in
the public interest" to seek redress. This expansive interpretation encourages a
ASSIGNMENT 1
SEMESTER 2
[Type the author name]
[ LEGAL ASPECTS OF
ENVIRONMENTAL
MANAGEMENT LEG2601 ]
LEG2601 Semester 2 2024 2 Department of Public, International Law This letter contains Constitutional
and the first assignment question for your module.Assignment 1 Semester 2024 2 Department of Public,
International Law This letter contains Constitutional and the first assignment question for your
module.DUE DATE: 06 September 2024 at 23:00 – no extensions will be granted!
, Question:
Examine the differences between the right to access courts (Locus Standi) as
outlined in section 38 of the Constitution and section 32 of the National
Environmental Management Act. In your response, explore the importance of
broadening legal standing in environmental issues.
Total: 20 Marks
Essays
### The Right to Access Courts: A Comparative Analysis of Locus Standi in the
Constitution and NEMA
Access to courts is a fundamental element of a democratic society, enabling
individuals to seek justice and enforce their rights. Within the South African legal
framework, locus standi—or the right to appear in court—serves as a critical
gateway to accessing justice. Two significant legislative provisions outline this
right: Section 38 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, and
Section 32 of the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA) of 1998.
While both provisions aim to facilitate legal standing, they differ in their
application and implications, particularly concerning environmental issues. This
essay will examine the differences between these two sections and highlight the
importance of broadening legal standing in addressing environmental challenges.
#### Locus Standi under the Constitution
Section 38 of the South African Constitution establishes a broad approach to locus
standi. It empowers individuals and groups to approach the courts if they believe
that a fundamental right, outlined in the Bill of Rights, has been infringed or
threatened. Importantly, it allows not only individuals but also "anyone acting in
the public interest" to seek redress. This expansive interpretation encourages a
