The Pretoria high court has set new deadlines for agriculture minister John Steenhuisen and issued a punitive costs order in ongoing litigation over the government’s handling of FMD vaccination.
The court ordered Steenhuisen to publish a vaccination scheme under section 10 of the Animal Diseases Act by May 5. It also scheduled an urgent hearing for May 11 to consider an interdict application brought by Sakeliga, the Southern African Agri Initiative, and Free State Agriculture.
The matter forms part of a broader legal dispute in which the applicants challenge the state’s control over the procurement and administration of FMD vaccines. They argue that there is no legal barrier preventing private-sector vaccination and seek to stop government interference in private importation and use of approved vaccines.
The high court has previously found the matter urgent and already imposed deadlines on the minister to produce a vaccination framework. In March, the court ordered Steenhuisen to finalise a draft scheme allowing for some form of private vaccination and criticised delays in the department’s response.
In the latest proceedings, the minister and departmental officials requested a postponement of the case to allow more time to finalise the scheme. The court refused the request and imposed a revised timetable, signalling dissatisfaction with the pace of the government’s response.
The litigation arises from the government’s position that FMD vaccination must remain centrally controlled to ensure compliance with biosecurity standards and protect export markets. The department of agriculture has argued that unregulated private vaccination could undermine traceability and disease management efforts.
Opposing organisations maintain that state control has delayed access to vaccines and contributed to losses in the agricultural sector. They seek judicial intervention to permit parallel private vaccination efforts while the outbreak continues.
The high court will hear arguments on May 11, when it will consider whether to grant an interdict against the state’s approach.
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.