IN the heart of South Africa’s vineyards, Diana Ndleleni, a farmworker who had toiled for six years under the Cape Town sun, collapsed among the grapevines that produce the world-renowned wines. Her doctor attributed her permanent lung damage to years of inhaling pesticides used on the grapes and declared her unfit to work again.
Nearly a year after her hospitalisation, Ndleleni joined hundreds of women in a march, demanding the ban of pesticides that are prohibited in the European Union but continue to be imported into South Africa. Workers have reported a range of health problems, from rashes to asthma and even cancer, which they attribute to exposure to these toxic chemicals.
‘These pesticides are a silent killer,’ declared Ndleleni, standing outside a community hall in Paarl, a town east of Cape Town, where hundreds of female farmworkers gathered to voice their concerns. She added, ‘I felt very, very sad when I learned they were banned in other countries, but not here. Why are our lives less important?’ Ndleleni, aged 61, spoke in a raspy voice between coughs, explaining that she had been too unwell to work since late 2022.
Ndleleni is a member of the Women on Farms Project, an organisation dedicated to advocating for the rights of female farmworkers in South Africa. While both men and women in the agricultural sector are affected by pesticides, women are often hired as seasonal workers and are not provided with proper training or personal protective equipment (PPE), making them more vulnerable to health risks.
Research by the Heinrich Böll Foundation in 2023 revealed that between 2018 and 2019, an estimated 140,908 tonnes of pesticides banned in the EU due to health and environmental risks were exported by EU countries and Britain to nations including Brazil, South Africa, and Kenya.
The United Nations Special Rapporteur on Toxics and Human Rights, Marcos Orellana, who visited South Africa in August, criticised the EU’s export of banned pesticides, stating that it ‘reproduces long-standing racist and colonial patterns of exploitation.’
Farmworkers allege that doctors often work for the farms and are unwilling to provide reports attributing health issues to pesticide exposure, despite acknowledging the causes verbally.
The Women on Farms Project is specifically focused on the 67 pesticides banned by the EU and is working to obtain medical reports from independent doctors to establish a link, building on existing academic research from the University of Cape Town.
The UnPoison network, a South African research and advocacy group, has compiled a list of 192 highly hazardous pesticides registered and used in South Africa. More than a third of these chemicals are banned in the EU.
These pesticides include mevinphos, known for causing neurological defects; carbofuran, associated with reproductive and developmental defects; and terbufos, an insecticide with neurotoxic effects, according to UnPoison.
Colette Solomon, the director of Women on Farms, argued, ‘It is double standards because if these chemicals are so harmful to the EU, it cannot be right that it is okay for our country. African lives are of equal value to European lives.’
Orellana called on South Africa to ‘ban the import of all highly hazardous pesticides… without delay’ and to eliminate existing stockpiles.
While the European Commission pledged in 2020 to prevent the production of chemicals banned in the EU for export, it has not yet ceased the practice, launching a public consultation on the issue in May this year.
During the protest, women marched through Paarl, carrying placards reading ‘Racist double standards’ and ‘African workers’ lives matter.’ They converged at the offices of Bayer, a major German pharmaceutical and biotechnology company with a significant presence in South Africa, to hand over a memorandum demanding an end to the production and export of banned pesticides.
Both Bayer and CropLife, an industry association, emphasised that the safe use of pesticides depends on following label instructions. Bayer stated that its products are ‘safe to use when applied according to the label instructions’ and that it fully complies with local laws and regulations. CropLife argued that South Africa’s different climate, crops, and pests necessitate unique approaches and that PPE should be worn when product instructions recommend it.
Farmworkers countered that they were often instructed to work in fields shortly after pesticide application without adequate protective gear. They also claimed that pesticides drifted onto nearby settlements and that they had no choice but to use sprayed fields as restrooms due to a lack of toilets.
Carmen Louw, co-director of Women on Farms, stressed that ‘non-compliance of farmers is a separate issue from toxicity of pesticides,’ highlighting the need for stricter regulations.
The prevalence of hazardous pesticides in South Africa is attributed to outdated regulations, a lack of pesticide residue testing, the absence of a public chemical database, illegal pesticide imports, unregulated spraying practices, and limited alternatives for farmers, according to Anna Shevel, coordinator of the UnPoison network.
Shevel noted that the South African public remains unaware of the number of hazardous pesticides used in food production, as there is no public pressure on retailers to demand safer products.
While the DALRRD (Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development) of South Africa pledged to phase out some chemicals by June 2024, UnPoison argued that these are not the most dangerous substances and that the announcement lacks specifics regarding timelines and methodology.
The DALRRD stated that it will ‘continue to review the safety of pesticides that are used in South Africa in line with International trends.’
Colette Solomon of Women on Farms believes that legal action will be a crucial tool in combating pesticide poisoning. She pointed to Germany’s new law, introduced in January 2023, which requires German companies to ensure the well-being of workers along their value chain. France also has progressive legislation prohibiting the production and export of hazardous substances.
Solomon emphasised, ‘We want to test these laws. Laws are wonderful on paper, but in terms of implementation, does it have teeth? If there is a ban, it should be global.’