The National Union of Mineworkers (NUM) has declared the Pretoria High Court’s rejection of a R54-billion settlement between Eskom and the energy regulator a direct threat to the survival of the state-owned entity, framing the legal challenge as an ideological attack on the nation’s economic backbone.
In a strongly worded statement released on Thursday, the union condemned the court’s decision to set aside the closed-door agreement between Eskom and the National Energy Regulator of South Africa (Nersa), which would have resolved a multi-year dispute over electricity tariffs.
The ruling, delivered earlier this week, found the settlement unlawful. Reason being that it deliberately excluded public participation in a decision directly affecting future power prices.
Malicious manoeuvre by AfriForum
NUM, however, views the legal action brought by AfriForum — which led to the judgment — as a malicious manoeuvre.
“NUM views the legal challenge brought by AfriForum as an unpatriotic and counter-revolutionary act. One that is… designed to destabilise the national utility,” the statement read.
At the heart of the union’s argument is Eskom’s dire financial state. The union asserts that Eskom’s ability to function is contingent on recovering legitimate costs through tariffs. This mechanism is undermined by the court’s intervention. It traces the current crisis to past policies that compelled Eskom to purchase expensive electricity from Independent Power Producers (IPPs) while selling it at a loss.
“NUM has long warned that the introduction of IPPs would erode Eskom’s financial foundation,” said Khangela Baloyi, NUM Energy Sector Coordinator.
Threat to Eskom stability
“While we have always been concerned about the burden pass-through costs on the end-user, the reality is that if Eskom cannot recover these costs, it will face total collapse.”
The court’s judgment found severe procedural flaws in the R54-billion agreement. The ruling criticised Nersa for seeking to avoid public scrutiny of a prior R107-billion calculation error. And it described the settlement figure as arbitrary and lacking a clear mathematical basis. The judgment has not been directly addressed by NUM’s statement.
The court ordered Nersa to reopen its tariff decision for the forthcoming financial years for proper public consultation. A process that must conclude by January 2026.
NUM’s response calls for a fundamental policy reversal. It labels the unbundling of Eskom and the reliance on IPPs a “failed experiment” driven by a neoliberal agenda. It demands that government reviews these processes, protect the national grid from “ideological legal challenges”, and recommit to a vertically integrated state utility.
Lack of transparency
The union’s position sets up a stark clash between two constitutional imperatives: the need for a financially viable Eskom to ensure energy security and the legal requirement for transparent, participatory governance on matters of significant public interest.
NUM frames the issue as one of national survival. However, the court’s ruling anchored its decision in the principle that secretive determinations are anathema to South Africa’s democratic framework.
The immediate effect of the judgment is that the existing 2025/2026 electricity tariffs will remain. But future yearly increases must now be recalculated through a transparent process. Eskom and Nersa have also been ordered to jointly cover the legal costs of the intervening parties.
