A group of organisations, academics, and unions on Thursday, December 5, 2024, sent a letter of demand to the South African Minister of Agriculture, Mr. John Steenhuisen, requiring him to immediately ban the lethal chemical that has been implicated in the deaths of six children – Terbufos.
At least 22 people have reportedly died from ingesting highly hazardous pesticides (HHPs) in recent months – of which Terbufos is one – in food-related incidents. Many of these are children from impoverished neighbourhoods.
In a 16-page letter of demand, the petitioners laid out a history of ongoing abject regulatory failure and commercial conflicts of interest in the governance of hazardous substances that have resulted in highly toxic, restricted chemicals ending up in domestic settings and informal food outlets.
They stated: “HHPs have historically had particularly devastating consequences for children. In 2023, experts published a paper showing that in one Cape Town mortuary, out of 50 children whose cause of death was suspected to be due to pesticides and for whom toxicological tests were conducted, 29 had died from Terbufos poisoning. Four others had died from the organophosphates methamidophos and diazinon. Of these deaths, 42.6% were children under five years and 40.7% were adolescents between 15 and 18. It is not only death by poisoning that is of concern, but also the long-term consequences of organophosphate poisoning for child development.
“There is increasing evidence that children surviving organophosphate poisoning suffer significant adverse neurodevelopmental impacts that will be lifelong. Professor Leslie London from the University of Cape Town’s School of Public Health stressed that the Minister of Agriculture must note the Constitutional imperative that the child’s best interests are of paramount importance in every matter concerning the child.”
The letter of demand also points out that even legal, registered use of these chemicals in the agriculture sector leads to loss of life and chronic health impacts for vulnerable peoples – particularly for farm workers and farm dwellers. The alliance argues that the only way to stop further loss of life and long-term poisoning impacts is to remove these toxins from the market.
“Therefore, we further demand that the Minister bans all HHPs that are already banned in the European Union within six months. The Minister has been put on notice to implement these actions or face legal action within 21 days.”
The African Centre for Biodiversity (ACB) addressed the letter in its name, as well as on behalf of a coalition of farm workers and civil society organisations including the Women on Farms Project (WFP), the Commercial Stevedoring, Agricultural and Allied Workers Union (CSAAWU), Groundwork, Friends of the Earth SA, Trust for Community Outreach and Education (TCOE); Khanyisa Education and Development Trust (Khanyisa), and several academic experts working in the public health sector for decades concerning pesticides.
Director of the African Centre for Biodiversity, Mariam Mayet, says, “We have reached a point of no return. We are done talking. We are no longer prepared to tolerate corporate impunity and government inaction and complicity. We are here to challenge the notion that it’s okay to sacrifice the health of our people and the environment at the altar of corporate profits.”
General secretary of CSAAWU, Deneco Dube, comments, “Farm workers are forced to work with these highly hazardous pesticides daily and no one is enforcing their rights to health and safety. When they fall sick due to pesticide exposure, the bosses say it’s because of drugs and alcohol. They get no compensation or help with medical bills; they can lose their jobs and homes. It is a lie that labels can make poisons safe, they must be banned.”
HHPs, including Terbufos
In 2015, the international community adopted a resolution that recognises HHPs as an issue of concern and calls for concerted action to address them.
According to the World Health Organisation (WHO), “pesticides are inherently hazardous, and among them, a relatively small number of Highly Hazardous Pesticides (HHPs) cause disproportionate harm to the environment and human health including severe environmental hazards, high acute and chronic toxicity”.
Terbufos is classified by the WHO as an extremely hazardous class 1a organophosphate pesticide and cholinesterase inhibitor. Terbufos has neurotoxic effects and is particularly dangerous to children and adolescents. It has been banned for use in the EU since 2009, although some countries in the EU apply double standards and continue to allow the production and export of Terbufos, especially to developing countries.
Terbufos has been banned in the Southern African Development Community (SADC) by Angola, Comoros, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius, Mozambique, Namibia, the Seychelles, Tanzania, and Zambia. Botswana’s ban came into effect on December 1. Zimbabwe has not imported any Terbufos since 2002.
South Africa’s townships have long experienced problems with massive pest infestations and the selling of pesticides on streets and in informal markets. Street pesticides are poisonous substances that are legally registered for agricultural uses but are decanted illegally into unlabelled beverage bottles or packets for home use. Or they might be illegally packaged pesticides imported into SA and not registered for use. Typically, they are acquired from agricultural cooperatives, garden shops, and hardware stores.
This restricted substance – Terbufos – is registered exclusively for use in the agricultural sector, including for use on maize, potatoes, dry beans, and sorghum. However, it is widely available and can be bought in spaza shops and through street traders – as a so-called “street pesticide” for domestic use in townships and informal settlements to control rats, as a result of the collapse of essential service delivery to the urban poor.
End double standards and environmental racism
In 2023, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Human Rights and Toxins, Dr Marcos Orellana, made an exploratory visit to South Africa. In his formal report, published in July 2024, Dr Orellana observed that regulatory failure and corporate capture are resulting in human rights and environmental rights violations. He reported that historically disadvantaged communities are disproportionately impacted by toxins and pollution.
He also questioned the South African government’s lax attitude towards HHPs, saying, “Despite the scientific evidence of their harms and the fact that they cannot be safely used, many HHPs are still legal and in use in SA. In 2022, there were 34 reported cases of poisoning and five deaths in Gauteng caused by an organophosphate, likely Terbufos. Paraquat is another example of a pesticide that is widely available and responsible for serious health impacts and deaths.
“These two pesticides, amongst many others, are banned in the EU, yet they are still produced in European countries for export, particularly to developing countries. This practice reproduces long-standing racist and colonial patterns of exploitation. Equally, the South African Government must protect its people and not contribute to reinforcing these double standards.”
Constitutional obligation to ban Terbufos and HHPs
The coalition of organisations petitioning Minister Steenhuisen submitted that, in the current circumstances, he (Steenhuisen) has a Constitutional obligation to issue a ban on Terbufos immediately, and other HHPs within a fixed six months, for implementation in the public interest, and to protect the right to life and right to an environment of unknown numbers of persons who may be exposed to and possibly killed by this chemical if such bans are not implemented.
Further, said the alliance, to protect the public, the Minister of Agriculture must take steps to prevent Terbufos and HHPs from being substituted by an equally toxic agricultural remedy once they are banned.
The coalition called on the Minister to, “indicate his willingness to undertake the steps set out in this letter within 21 days of the date of this letter, failing which we reserve our rights to bring legal action to compel the Minister to take these steps. We trust this will not be necessary.”
