SHROUDED IN SECRECY: Five years of silence — who is assessing the assessors of SA’s environmental future?

{JSON.stringify(article.attachments[0], null, 2)} --> While legal and engineering bodies publicly log disciplined members, South Africa's environmental assessment regulator faces questions over years of silence regarding professional misconduct and sanctions.

The Legal Practice Council is responsible for investigating complaints and recommending the suspension or striking-off of attorneys and advocates for malpractice. The Engineering Council of South Africa also has procedures to ensure professional service and ethical behaviour from engineers, with the outcomes of disciplinary action published in the Government Gazette.

Similar principles apply to members of the Environmental Assessment Practitioners Association of South Africa (Eapasa). This is the official registration authority for roughly 2,600 private and state-sector professionals charged with assessing and approving mandatory environmental impact assessment (EIA) studies.

But while the results of disciplinary inquiries involving errant lawyers or engineers are published for all to see, Eapasa has maintained a curious silence on this issue.

For five years, Daily Maverick has been asking Eapasa for a list of the environmental practitioners who have been fined, suspended or expelled from the association for misdemeanour or ethical breaches since its official establishment roughly 14 years ago.

More recently (on 23 June), we sent the same questions to Eapasa following the election of its new board, now chaired by Durban-based practitioner Sabelo Nkosi.

Since the establishment of Eapasa in 2012, how many formal, written complaints has the association received against its registered member practitioners/candidate practitioners for alleged misconduct or breaches of the Eapasa Code of Ethical Conduct and Practice?

Of these complaints, how many were referred to the Professional Conduct Committee (PCC) for a formal inquiry?

How many complaints were upheld by the committee; how many were dismissed and what sanctions/measures were applied in respect of the complaints that were upheld?

Does Eapasa wish to comment on the possible reasons why so few complaints appear to have been lodged with or upheld by the PCC?

Eapasa’s registrar and CEO, Dr Patrick Sithole, acknowledged receipt of our queries on 2 July, but nearly two months later, the association has not provided any responses, despite follow-up requests. Nor is there any visible evidence of practitioners being sanctioned on the Eapasa website.

In many respects, environmental assessment practitioners (EAPs) can be considered to be the custodians of a sound and sustainable environmental future for South Africa.

Their broad responsibility includes the planning, management, coordination or review of environmental impact assessments (EIAs), while public sector practitioners are responsible for scrutinising these assessments and drafting authorisations.

As such, they exercise significant influence and power in advising the government on whether to approve, modify or refuse projects with potentially negative environmental impacts.