plastic pollution Thin plastics plastic pollution Thin plastics

High Court upholds thin plastics ban

The High Court in Lilongwe dismissed plastic manufacturers’ challenge against Malawi’s thin plastics ban, citing abuse of court process and suppression of material facts. Justice Howard Pemba ruled that the manufacturers deliberately delayed enforcement by filing repeated legal challenges since 2014. The court also found their nine-year delay in seeking judicial review unjustified, marking a victory for environmental regulations.

The High Court in Lilongwe has dismissed an application by plastic manufacturers challenging Malawi’s ban on thin plastics, citing abuse of court process and suppression of material facts by the claimants.

In a ruling delivered by Justice Howard Pemba, the court discharged permission for judicial review and lifted the injunction that had temporarily halted the enforcement of the 2015 Environmental Management (Plastics) Regulations (EMR2015).

The case was filed by 11 plastic manufacturing companies, including City Plastics Industry, Flexo Pack Ltd, and Jagot Plastics Limited, against the Minister of Natural Resources and Climate Change and the Attorney General.

Advertisement

The manufacturers argued that the 2015 regulations were unlawfully implemented without a recommendation from the National Council for the Environment and were not properly laid before Parliament.

thin plastics
Activists march in this profile photo

However, the government countered that the case was a deliberate attempt to delay enforcement of the plastics ban, pointing to multiple previous lawsuits filed by the same companies.

Justice Pemba ruled that the case was a misuse of judicial processes, highlighting that similar legal challenges had been filed since 2014.

“The claimants have adopted a calculated strategy to repeatedly challenge and frustrate the enforcement of EMR2015 by raising new legal grounds each time. This is a clear abuse of court process,” Justice Pemba stated.

Justice Pemba noted that lack of full disclosure misled the court when the claimants initially sought permission for judicial review.

“This perhaps can be called a partial disclosure which would still deprive the court of some material that could necessitate the grant or decline to grant permission. I wish to agree with the Defendants that the Claimants had to disclose among others, the grounds, issues, and outcome of the previous proceedings. I say this on the basis that as I have held herein, the issues in the other reviews were also to the effect of seeking to annul the EMR2015. In my considered view, it was incumbent on the Claimants to disclose these relevant matters fully,” reads the judgement.

Another key reason for dismissal was the nine-year delay in filing for judicial review.

The court found that the claimants had ample opportunity to challenge the regulations when they were introduced in 2015, but instead waited until 2024 to seek legal action.

While an earlier court had granted an extension of time, Justice Pemba ruled that revisiting the issue now would undermine judicial integrity.

The decision marks a major victory for environmental activists who have long pushed for stricter regulations on plastic pollution in Malawi.

About the Author

IMG 0438 scaled Thin plastics
News Reporter at Nthanda Times | Website | + posts

Sosten Mpinganjira is a news reporter with a track record of delivering timely and accurate news stories. With vast experience working with renowned news electronic, press, and online outlets, he has honed his reporting skills and has a deep understanding of the media landscape. He has a knack for delivering breaking news with accuracy and insight. He is dedicated to keeping his readers informed about current events and trends that shape our world.

Keep Up to Date with the Most Important News

By pressing the Subscribe button, you confirm that you have read and are agreeing to our Privacy Policy
Advertisement
error: