Evictions from ‘bad buildings’ in Johannesburg unconstitutional, rules High Court

COHRE/CALS JOINT MEDIA RELEASE – 3 March 2006

Evictions from ‘bad buildings’ in Johannesburg unconstitutional, rules High Court

The High Court of South Africa, sitting in Johannesburg, today handed down a ground-breaking judgement concerning the housing rights of the poor in the inner city of Johannesburg.

Judge Mahomed Jajbhay ruled that the City of Johannesburg’s housing policy fails to comply with the Constitution of South Africa because it does not cater for the needs of the inner city poor.

The Judge ordered the city to devise and implement a comprehensive plan to cater for people living in the inner city of Johannesburg who are in desperate need of accommodation.

The judgement makes it clear that the poor people resident in so-called “bad buildings” of the inner city of Johannesburg must be given access to a home in the inner city area if the city wants to evict them from accommodation it considers unsafe.

Jean du Plessis, Deputy Director of the Geneva-based Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions (COHRE), said, “We welcome the ruling of the High Court effectively banning evictions from ‘bad buildings’ without the provision of alternatives in Johannesburg. We are pleased to note that this is in accordance with South Africa’s new Constitution and with various international legal standards, including the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which South Africa has yet to ratify.”

Du Plessis added, “Today’s ruling, similar to the Grootboom judgement of 2000, again confirms the importance, internationally, of the South African Constitution in advancing the right to adequate housing and protection against forced evictions. We call on the City of Johannesburg to abide by the ruling, to immediately halt all planned evictions, to enter into dialogue with affected communities to find mutually acceptable alternatives and to provide redress for those who have been evicted in the past.”

More than 300 residents from four houses on Joel Street in Berea, a multi-storey building known as “San Jose”, also in Berea, and a disused panel beating workshop on Main Street, in the city centre, challenged the Johannesburg Metro’s practice of evicting poor people from allegedly unsafe buildings onto the inner city streets. In his ruling the Judge dismissed the eviction applications brought by the City of Johannesburg against these residents. He also interdicted the City from evicting or seeking to evict the residents until such time as adequate alternative accommodation in the inner city area has been provided.

The residents, represented by attorneys from the Wits Law Clinic and Webber Wentzel Bowens, claimed the city’s practice of clearing so-called “bad buildings” in the inner city is unconstitutional.

A spate of forced evictions in the inner city areas of Johannesburg since 2001 have been officially justified in the name of the Johannesburg Inner City Regeneration Strategy (ICRS). A key component of this programme is the clearance of an estimated 235 “bad” buildings, which are perceived to be sources of degeneration and crime.

Thousands of South Africans live in “bad buildings” because they cannot afford decent accommodation in the private residential market, nor any of the chronically over-subscribed social housing units available in the inner city. In research done in 2004 and 2005, COHRE and the Centre for Applied Legal Studies (CALS) found that the majority of occupants of the buildings were ordinary, poor South Africans engaged in a daily struggle to survive, and that they were the victims rather than the perpetrators of crime. The research also showed that while many of the buildings did require urgent maintenance and services, conditions in them did not warrant the use of apartheid-era legislation to clear them of people.

COHRE and CALS said that it was imperative for the residents of “bad” buildings to maintain their access to the inner city, and expressed their delight at the Judge’s finding that: “The right to work is one the most precious liberties that an individual possesses. An individual has as much right to work as the individual has to live, to be free and to own property. To work means to eat and consequently to live. This constitutes an encompassing view of humanity. The [City Council’s] suggestion that the [residents] be relocated to an informal settlement flies in the face of the concept of . . . Ubuntu.”

COHRE, CALS and inner city residents’ associations have repeatedly campaigned for the City to cease the evictions and to focus on innovative, alternative methods of regenerating buildings in the inner city.

Cathi Albertyn, Director of CALS, said, “Since 2001, the city of Johannesburg has been carrying out supposedly urgent “health and safety” evictions from so-called “bad buildings”, using the National Buildings Regulations and Building Standards Act, which was passed under apartheid, to secure eviction orders. We sincerely hope today’s ruling will set an important precedent, act as a deterrent to future evictions and clearly expose the City’s policy of ‘bad building’ clearances as arbitrary, inhumane and in violation of international human rights law and South Africa’s Constitution.”

Any Room for the Poor? Forced Evictions in Johannesburg, South Africa, a joint report released by COHRE and CALS in February 2005, estimated that the backlog of decent low-cost housing in the Johannesburg inner city area stood at around 18,000 households. Most, if not all, of these households are likely to live in so-called “bad buildings”.

For interviews or additional information please contact:

Jean du Plessis, COHRE, +27.82.557.5563 or email: media@cohre.org, jean@cohre.org

Stuart Wilson, CALS, +27.72.265.8633 or email: wilsons@law.wits.ac.za

Also see www.cohre.org