The City's camp for the homeless at the Strandfontein Sports complex. Picture: Phando Jikelo/African News Agency (ANA) The City's camp for the homeless at the Strandfontein Sports complex. Picture: Phando Jikelo/African News Agency (ANA)
Cape Town – The case brought against the City by Strandfontein community organisations - for violating lockdown regulations by relocating around 1 500 homeless people to the area - is expected to be heard in the Western Cape High Court tomorrow.
The community organisations lodged a case against City manager Lungelo Mbandazayo and the Cape Town City Council last week, calling for the site to be closed as it did not comply with the Covid-19 lockdown regulations.
The organisations - Strandfontein Social and Economic Development Forum and Strandfontein Ratepayers Association, with written support from Strandfontein Community Policing Forum (CPF) and Strandfontein Facility Management Committee (FMC) - are represented by attorney Vernon Seymour.
The community organisations said by setting up an “overcrowded” camp for the homeless, the City manager and council had violated regulation 11D of the lockdown regulations.
Mandy van Willingh, a spokesperson for the organisations, said in the City’s response that it had defended its right to be at the site, and claimed that it was compliant.
“It cited that there were 24 tents for accommodation - we have pictures to disprove that. The total number of tents on the field is 24 but they are not all for accommodation.
"Only eight are occupied by homeless people, the rest are smaller medical tents and meal tents,” she said.
“The City is lying in its statement about the number of tents being used for accommodation. This is what its defence is based on and we will prove otherwise with witnesses who have actually been on site.
"We are doing this for our community as well as the homeless people as everyone’s health is at risk, on and around that field,” said Van Willingh.
City spokesperson Luthando Tyhalibongo said: “This matter will be before the court later this week, and it is therefore not advisable to comment until the court has heard the matter.”