The City has been ordered to provide transitional housing in the inner city for the evicted people.
Described a victory not only for Bromwell Street residents but in the broader fight for equitable access to land and housing, the City has been ordered to provide transitional housing in the inner city for the evicted people.
After an eight-year legal battle, the Constitutional Court declared the City’s implementation of its own National Housing Programme unconstitutional and that it “unreasonably failed to adopt its own Temporary Emergency Accommodation (Tea) Policy” when it declined accommodation in the inner city without considering the circumstances of individuals. The Concourt ruled that the City must provide the applicants with temporary emergency accommodation or transitional housing in Woodstock or Salt River or, failing those, the inner city precinct within six months.
The City said while the court found against them, it “confirmed that the Constitution does not guarantee a person a right to emergency housing at government expense at the location of their choice”.
“The City reiterates that it is not financially feasible for any municipality in South Africa to provide alternative accommodation for private evictions in the location of the evictees’ choice.
“This would be financially ruinous for every municipality and would absorb the entire State housing budget allocations, stopping all other spending on public housing. The court has recognised this impossibility.
“In other aspects of the case, the court was critical of the City’s actions back in 2017, and upheld the applicants’ appeal, ruling that the City (in 2017) should have at least considered offering emergency accommodation in Woodstock back then, and that a policy must be in place that enables this to be considered on a reasonable, rational basis in future. The City accepts the court guidance with respect to the need for a policy (over and above the Housing Act and Code) regarding offers of temporary emergency accommodation,” the City said.
Ndifuna Ukwazi’s Disha Govender said the judgment is a victory not only for their clients but in the broader fight for equitable access to land and housing.
“Many years ago the people of Woodstock and Salt River, through their determination and spirit, managed to fight and push back against the apartheid government’s forced removals.
“Thirty years into democracy, when faced with new attempts at displacement caused by gentrification and state failure, I am humbled by the continued determination and spirit of my clients and many others who are fighting for their right to the city.”
As amicus curiae (friends of the court), Abahlali baseMjondolo said they had been struggling for well-located land to be provided for the poor and marginalised for the past 19 years.
“The poor have the same right to access the cities as everyone else. We deserve to be treated with respect and dignity.
“We need to be treated like human beings, not ... to be dumped in human dumping grounds like Wolwerivier and Blikkiesdorp. These human dumping grounds are without opportunities for work and education. This judgment is very important for our movement and all organisations that struggle and advocate for well-located land to be made available for the poor, for the social value of land to be given more weight than its commercial value,” the land activist group said.
GOOD Party’s Brett Herron said the judgment confirms the duty of governments, at the various levels, to address inherited spatial injustice as part of their housing programmes.
“Governments need to be nimble, reasonable and innovative as they navigate urban pressures of rapid urbanisation, urban development and gentrification.”
The ANC said: “The City’s attempt to remove the Bromwell Street residents and dump them 15 kilometres from their homes, places of work and schools bears a striking resemblance to the May 1901 decision by the Cape Town Council to establish Nbadeni Township following the outbreak of the Bubonic Plague on February 7, 1901 in the Mother City, blaming the outbreak on Africans. It bears reminding that the 1901 decision marked the origins of spatial apartheid in South Africa, a legacy the current leadership of the City of Cape Town is determined to sustain.”
Cape Times
Related Topics: