Aia Trust
Animals in Durban

The AIA was formed in 2006 by a group of concerned citizens and passionate animal keepers in response to a radical draft policy published by Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife ( EKZNW) and put out for short notice public comment without stakeholder input.

During the course of the dispute, it came to the attention of AIA that the Ezemvelo Board did not have the full complement of members required by the Management Act. The Management Act stipulates that the Board must comprise a minimum of nine members and that various categories of member must be filled. Without its full complement of members the Ezemvelo Board could not function legally. It has been a very tough year for anyone in Aviculture, between a world recession and veterinary health restrictions, it hasn’t been easy. So it is with extreme gratitude that we acknowledge the very generous donation of FIFTY THOUSAND RAND from AIA Trustee and Chairman William Horsfield towards our ever growing legal fees. We can only assume that he was not correctly briefed. We pointed out to the Premier that not he, the Board, the NCS or the CEO of the NCS, have the statutory power to engage in such a process, the validity of the appointment of members of the Board aside. Point We do not understand how our clients’ challenge to your clients’ actions in the current process can reflect on the question of costs in the matter before the court. In the interests of not distracting the focus of the parties (and the public) from the matter in court, we will recommend to our clients that they call a truce on any further comments about your client’s conduct if your clients call off all meetings in the process referred above until the litigation is complete. Since our client does not recognise your clients’ right to embark upon the process concerned in the first place, or the legitimacy thereof, our client will continue to take the matter up with the Premier until the process is terminated. A copy of the relevant letter is attached for your ease of reference. A notice inviting participation in the process was also published in the local press. In view of the uncertainty of the validity of the appointment of the Board, and the court action which had been launched, our clients considered the timing of the process inappropriate. Ezemvelo was invited to withdraw the process but has declined to do so. In our respectful view, you do not have the power to undertake the process in question and neither does Ezemvelo. Logically therefore, the First Respondent has the responsibility to conduct the process embarked upon by the Fourth Respondent with the Second Respondent. In the administration of TOPS, the First Respondent is undertaking a function entrusted to her by national legislation and she is accountable to the national minister for the performance thereof. We have threatened the officials concerned that we will seek the wasted costs of the various abortive processes from the officials concerned in their personal capacities under section 49 of the National Environmental Management Act 107 of As a matter of courtesy, the letter is also copied to the State Attorney, the MEC and Ezemvelo. As you should be aware by now, we act for the Animal Interest Alliance. In particular, you must, with respect, follow the letter of the law or your actions will be judicially reviewable. As you are well aware, there is already an application before the High Court which deals inter alia with your past indiscretions in not adhering to the strict conditions imposed by the Act. Our second complaint is that if the only method you have prescribed, is to communicate your invitation to the residents of the province by publication in the popular press, this is inadequate and does not comply with the Act. Your invitation will not reach the greater population of the province who reside in rural areas and are those most affected by the functions of the Board.