Excerpt: On Thursday, 19 February 2026 at 10h00, the High Court Western Cape Division, Cape Town will hear an urgent application brought by Liberty Fighters Network (LFN) against the Democratic Alliance (DA) run City of Cape Town, CapeNature and SANParks under case number 2026-024184.
At stake is not simply baboon management — but the legality, transparency and traceability of the Final Cape Peninsula Baboon Management Action Plan. LFN contends that irreversible implementation steps cannot proceed without clearly identified, lawfully authorised administrative decisions capable of judicial scrutiny. After the City and CapeNature refused to support a remote hearing, the matter will now be heard in open court. Members of the public are invited to attend.
If you like our work, why not consider a donation or gift of your choice?
or make a quick donation… MobiPaid
On Thursday, 19 February 2026 at 10h00, the High Court Western Cape Division, Cape Town will hear an urgent application brought by Liberty Fighters Network (LFN) under case number 2026-024184.
The matter concerns the legality, transparency and implementation of the Final Cape Peninsula Baboon Management Action Plan adopted under the Cape Peninsula Baboon Management Joint Task Team (CPBMJTT).
Despite LFN’s reasonable request that the matter be heard via MS Teams — a platform now routinely utilised by our courts — the Democratic Alliance (DA) run City of Cape Town and CapeNature refused to support a remote hearing. As a result, LFN has been compelled to appear in person before Justice Holderness.
📍 High Court, Western Cape Division, Cape Town
📅 Thursday, 19 February 2026
⏰ 10h00
But this case is far bigger than the question of a remote hearing.
What This Case Is About
At its core, this application is about lawful governance and accountability in environmental decision-making.
The respondents include the Premier of the Western Cape, the Provincial Minister for Environmental Affairs, the Office of the Commissioner of the Environment, SANParks, CapeNature, the City of Cape Town and others, as reflected in the pleadings .
The Final Action Plan, adopted in October 2025 and published thereafter, sets out implementation measures for managing baboons in the Cape Peninsula, including potentially irreversible interventions.
LFN does not ask the Court to “manage baboons”.
LFN asks a far more fundamental question:
Where are the lawful, traceable administrative decisions authorising the irreversible steps now being implemented?
The signature page relied upon by the respondents reflects that the Plan was approved “for the Cape Peninsula Baboon Management Joint Task Team” — not by clearly identified, independently authorised decision-makers exercising specific statutory powers .
That distinction matters.
In constitutional democracy, organs of state must act:
- Under an identified empowering provision;
- Through a properly authorised decision-maker;
- With a record of decision;
- With reasons capable of judicial scrutiny.
LFN’s Part A relief seeks interim oversight and disclosure to ensure that implementation proceeds lawfully and that irreversible measures are not taken before legality is established.
This is not an emotional or ideological case.
It is a constitutional one.
Why the Urgency?
The Action Plan contemplates implementation steps that may not be reversible once executed.
Once animals are removed, confined, sterilised, relocated or euthanised, no later court order can undo the physical consequences.
That is why interim relief is sought.
The respondents argue urgency is “self-created”. LFN disputes that narrative and has addressed the timeline in its replying affidavits, including reference to the approval dates reflected on the respondents’ own annexures .
The Court will determine that issue.
Why the Public Should Care
Table Mountain National Park is not an isolated wilderness. It is an urban, open-access national park serving millions of residents and visitors annually.
The way in which environmental governance decisions are taken here sets a precedent.
If organs of state may implement wide-reaching environmental action plans through structures whose internal decision-making is not transparently traceable, that precedent does not remain confined to baboons.
It affects:
- Public participation;
- Administrative justice;
- Environmental governance;
- The accountability of provincial and municipal authorities.
This case concerns whether constitutional safeguards are honoured when policy moves from paper to implementation.
An Open Invitation to the Public
Because the City and CapeNature refused to support a remote hearing, the matter will proceed in open court.
LFN invites members of the public — not only supporters — who have an interest in environmental governance, administrative justice, and constitutional accountability, to attend.
Justice is not strengthened in empty courtrooms.
Public scrutiny matters.
📍 High Court, Western Cape Division, Cape Town
📅 Thursday, 19 February 2026
⏰ 10h00
Whether you agree or disagree with LFN, the principle at stake belongs to everyone:
Government must act lawfully, transparently, and within clearly traceable authority.
The Court will now be asked to determine whether that standard has been met.
Liberation Greetings.
If you like our work, why not consider a donation or gift of your choice?
or make Quick donation… MobiPaid
Leave a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.