Nonhle Mbuthuma has lived all her life in Xolobeni in the Eastern Cape. She is a 40- year-old mother of one who farms at home and in the communal area.
For her, Xolobeni is not just a geographical area with mineral riches where an entire community can be uprooted for the sake of profit.
For her, Xolobeni is home; she was born there and has built her entire life in the area.
Xolobeni is where her heritage and identity are, it is where her family lives and where some of her loved ones are buried. For her it is where life begins and ends.
Recalling what her grandfather had said to her before he died, Mbuthuma said: "He told me that they fought for this land during the 1950s, they fought to protect the land for us, to make sure we are living in a healthy environment.
"So when I look at my grandfather's grave, it pains me to still be fighting the same fight he fought in the 1950s in 2018."
This week in the High Court in Pretoria the Amadiba Crisis Committee - a group of Xolobeni community members represented by Richard Spoor Inc Attorneys and the Legal Resources Centre - argued that the Department of Mineral Resources cannot allow Australian mining company Mineral Resources Commodities to mine titanium in Xolobeni.
How do you compensate for an entire life destroyed by mining?
— Johan Lorenzen, lawyer
In 2007 the Australian miner applied for a mining right for titanium in Xolobeni, but the community resisted.
For the past 11 years residents have pushed back against attempts by the miner to operate in the area.
In 2015 one of the leaders of the community was assassinated months after an attempt by the company to mine the area.
Mining companies in South Africa have been subjected to the wrath of communities experiencing rising unemployment, and many mining houses have been accused of failing to implement their social development and labour plans for the communities they operate in.
The Bench Marks Foundation, a nonprofit organisation, conducted a study that found that some mining companies did not adhere to their social and labour plans.
One example was Lonmin, which failed to build houses in the Marikana community of Rustenburg.
The foundation's Hassan Lorgat said studies showed that people who lived in mining areas had mostly not benefited from mining activities.
Pollution from the mine dumps in Soweto was one example of how communities were affected by mining, Lorgat said.
Another example was towns becoming ghost towns after mining companies left, as happened to Welkom.
Where there was platinum mining, as in Limpopo and North West, communities were poor and consistently complained about the lack of jobs and social development from some mining companies.
Lorgat added that he was optimistic about the arguments presented in court in the Xolobeni case.
Johan Lorenzen, a lawyer at Richard Spoor Inc, said 68 of the 75 households in the Xolobeni area farmed livestock - chickens, cows and goats - and the land was used for grazing.
The community accessed the sea and used seaweed for garnish and medicinal purposes.
Lorenzen added that most of the members farmed enough to sell some of their produce.
There were about 600 graves in the area that the residents valued. Therefore, the significance of the area means it is a customary law issue.
"The MPRDA [Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act] does not say how to calculate compensation for a community whose entire life is destroyed by mining.
"It must be calculated in a different way to perhaps a white farmer who might not like moving but will be able to have that same quality of life elsewhere," Lorenzen said.
The nonprofit Oxfam this week also released a report in support of the Xolobeni community which shows that the Australian miner, which has another mine in Matzikama, 30km from Cape Town, has failed to deliver on its community responsibilities in that area.
This raised questions about how it would take care of Xolobeni residents if it could not uplift the residents of Matzikama.
The Department of Mineral Resources has argued that should the court find in favour of the Xolobeni community it would open the door for other communities to go to court to challenge mining rights the department may issue.
It would cause a major problem for other prospecting rights because other communities would want to follow the route taken by the Xolobeni community, the department argued.
The Bench Marks Foundation and the lawyers were optimistic about the judgment, which they hope will be delivered within three months, but said they were ready to appeal if the judgement was in favour of the department and the Australian miner.
"Anything in court is possible, but on our side we know that we are prepared for any decision and we will appeal it all the way to the Constitutional Court," Mbuthuma said.
"And if the Constitutional Court says no as well, then we know it's not the end of the world because we were born and bred in this area and we are not going to be challenged by the judgement of the court.
"We have our own customary laws that must be recognised."
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.