Category Archives: The Kennedy Thirteen

Amnesty International Statement on the Kennedy Road Attacks

http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/AFR53/011/2009/en/53fce922-d49e-4537-b3bb-84060cf84c85/afr530112009en.html

South Africa: Failure to conduct impartial investigation into Kennedy Road violence is leading to further human rights abuses

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL

PUBLIC DOCUMENT AI Index: AFR 53/011/2009

16 December 2009

Amnesty International deplores the continuing failure of the South African authorities to investigate impartially and fully human rights abuses which occurred during and after armed violence at the Kennedy Road Informal Settlement (Kennedy Road) in Durban last September. This despite repeated calls since October for an independent and impartial commission of inquiry into the surrounding circumstances and extent of the violence and its aftermath.

The attack by a group of armed men which began during the night of 26 September resulted in at least two deaths as well as injuries to others in Kennedy Road. Homes were damaged and individuals and families were displaced or fled, either as a result of being directly attacked or from fear of being attacked.

The violence appears to have occurred within a complex national and local context relating to policies and possible differences of opinion over the future of informal settlements, in which an estimated 10 percent of South African households are located. Ensuring meaningful participation by affected communities in development planning is consistent with South Africa’s human rights obligations and is recognized in South African domestic law, through the role of municipal ward committees or other bodies. Amnesty International is concerned that the issue of the political control over the direction of development for Kennedy Road may have formed part of the motivation for the violent attack.

The activities of the community based economic and social rights movement, Abahlali baseMjondolo (Abahlali), and the affiliated Kennedy Road Development Committee (KRDC) have been disrupted by the violence and the lives of their leaders and supporters placed at risk. Furthermore the threats against and displacement of the KRDC members from Kennedy Road in September has undermined their ability to continue as a partner with the eThekwini (Durban) Municipality’s Housing Department in a development “upgrade project” for the residents of the settlement. These consequences are particularly worrying in view of media and other reports that in the weeks prior to the violent attack at Kennedy Road, governing party officials at provincial and local levels were expressing a determination to dissolve these community based organizations.

As a consequence of the authorities’ failure to conduct a full and impartial inquiry and to publicly and unequivocally condemn the apparently politically motivated violence which occurred in September, the lives of human rights defenders and government critics have been placed at risk. Furthermore, the confidence of the targeted groups in the impartiality and effectiveness of the criminal justice response to the violence has been undermined.

In October Amnesty International raised its concerns about the violent incidents in late September and the official response to them in letters to the Premier of KwaZulu-Natal Province, Dr Zweli Mkhize, and the provincial Minister for Transport, Community Safety and Liaison, Mr Willies Mchunu. Amnesty International expressed particular concern that credible information from its own inquiries indicated that:

* There had been a significant delay in the police response to calls for assistance made by members of the KRDC and Abahlali during the night of 26 September;

*During that night armed men appeared to be looking for specific individuals and members of specific organizations, including from the KRDC and the President and Deputy President of Abahlali;

*The men also used language which identified targets to be removed from Kennedy Road in ethnic terms, as “amaMpondo ”(Xhosa-speakers) or as non-Zulus; and

*Some of the eight individuals arrested by police on 27 September in connection with the violence may have been arrested not on the basis of a reasonable suspicion of having committed an offence, but due to their links with Abahlali.

Furthermore, Amnesty International expressed concern that public comments made by officials, in the immediate aftermath of the violence, about Abahlali and its leaders, including the president, S’bu Zikode, could have the effect of inappropriately criminalising a whole organization and making its members vulnerable to threats of violence. The Office of the Premier acknowledged receipt of Amnesty International’s letter, but the organization has not yet received a more substantial reply to its concerns.

To the organization’s knowledge there has been no explanation from the police regarding their apparent absence from Kennedy Road from around midnight on 26 September to approximately 06:30 on 27 September. They had been in the area briefly prior to midnight in response to a complaint of “fighting”, but then subsequently failed to respond to calls for help from members of Abahlali concerned about the intentions of a group of armed men who had come into the community hall where they were conducting a meeting. During the hours after midnight two people, Mthokozisi Ndlovu and Ndumiso Mnguni, whose affiliations are not known to Amnesty International, were fatally assaulted and others were injured.

Eight people were arrested on the morning of 27 September when the police returned to Kennedy Road. Five others were arrested over the following two weeks. All 13 of those arrested were supporters of Abahlali. All appeared to have a specific ethnic profile as Xhosa-speakers originally from the Eastern Cape Province.

The state has the primary legal obligation to investigate crime, and it is entirely appropriate for the state to investigate fully the deaths of Mthokozisi Ndlovu and Ndumiso Mnguni and the injuries of other unnamed individuals. At the same time the state also has a duty to protect all persons within its jurisdiction from violence, whether from public or private actors. To Amnesty International’s knowledge, the police have not arrested or charged anyone in connection with the actions of a group of 500 people, who, according to police information, were armed with pangas (machetes) and demanding the arrest of the eight Abahlali supporters on 27 September at Kennedy Road. Following the arrest of the eight, this group of armed individuals went on a rampage, throwing petrol bombs and apparently intending to burn down the arrested men’s shacks, according to police information.

That the homes of all 13 arrested men were destroyed was acknowledged in open court by the police Investigating Officer on 19 October and 4 November, during hearings on their bail application. The homes of other Abahlali and KRDC leaders were also damaged or destroyed at various times from late September and these crimes remain unaddressed. The apparent unwillingness of the relevant authorities in investigating these crimes, along with an atmosphere of official denunciation of the victims’ organization, has discouraged Abahlali members, supporters and others perceived to be supporters from lodging formal complaints with the police concerning continuing threats of violence made against them.

Of further concern is the lack of action in response to the threatening activities of demonstrators outside and inside the Durban Magistrate’s Court at the time of hearings in October and November on the bail application for the accused. Testimony and other evidence which Amnesty International has gathered indicate that the demonstrators, some of whom were wearing the insignia of the ruling African National Congress party, made specific threats of violence against a range of individuals, including members of Abahlali and of faith-based organizations supporting them, human rights monitors and, indirectly, against the accused should they be released on bail.

The sense of licence surrounding the activities of the demonstrators was also evident in their displaying of posters in the presence of the magistrate during bail application proceedings on 26 October and 2 November. The posters denounced the president of Abahlali as a “leader of killers” and called for life sentences for the accused. It appears that no effective steps were taken by court officials on 26 October to stop this conduct, which could amount to incitement or contempt of court and contribute to undermining the right to fair trial for the accused. On 2 November the magistrate asked the court orderlies to tell the poster-holders to take them down or leave the court.

By early December the bail application proceedings had extended over eight separate hearings from 8 October onwards. The presiding magistrate, concerned by the inability of the prosecutor and investigating officer to state in court which of the specific charges individual defendants were facing, insisted that an identification parade should be held. The parade was finally held on 21 November, after the majority of the accused had appeared in court eight times already. During the hearing on 27 November the prosecuting authorities made a simple confirmation of the various charges against each accused. During this hearing and previous ones, the prosecuting authorities did not indicate which evidence it was relying upon to support the charges.

At the conclusion of the hearing on 27 November, the court agreed to withdraw all charges against one of the defendants, Simbongile Magaqana. Seven others were granted conditional bail,1and the remaining five were remanded back in custody for further investigation.2 The charges still under investigation against the remaining 12 accused range from property crimes and public violence to murder. A hearing scheduled for 11 December, on the application for bail of the five men still in remand custody, did not take place due to the failure of the prosecutor and investigating officer to appear in court. The hearing was adjourned until 22 January 2010.

Amnesty International is concerned that the current response by the authorities to the events at Kennedy Road in late September is not addressing the causes which may have lead to the violence, nor ensuring to all those affected their access to effective and impartial legal remedies and protection of their rights to freedom of association and freedom of expression.

The authorities have ignored widespread calls for a commission of inquiry into the circumstances of the violence. The call, first made by Abahlali, for an official state inquiry, was strongly supported by Church leaders and a range of other civil society organizations. More recently, in view of the lack of government response, the Church leaders announced their intention to establish an independent inquiry into the Kennedy Road events.

Amnesty International believes that a thorough, open and impartial inquiry could have important benefits for the protection of human rights both locally and in other areas of South Africa. This is especially in view of current concerns and protests over the failures of some local government authorities to deliver access to basic services in poor communities.

In regard to the events at Kennedy Road in late September and subsequently, it is vital to clarify if there has occurred any infringements by state or non state actors of the rights to freedom of expression or association or other human rights abuses committed against any person on the basis of their perceived or actual ethnic or cultural identity or political affiliation.

Amnesty International reiterates its call made to the authorities in October to ensure that the human rights of all residents of Kennedy Road, including those who have been displaced by the violence, are fully protected; that victims of human rights abuses have access to impartial and effective remedies and the perpetrators of those abuses are brought to justice.

END/

1 They are Simvumile Limaphi, Thokozani Mtwana, Thobuxolo Mazeka, Sibulelo Mambi, Zamandla Mazeka, Nkosisizwe Njiyela and Fundisile Nkoyi.

2 They are Khaliphile Jali, Zandisile Ngutyana, Situtu Koyi, Sicelo Mambi and Samkeliso Mkokelwa.

All We Want is Justice

Click here to read this statement in French.

30 November 2009
Abahlali baseMjondolo Press Statement

All We Want is Justice

The Kennedy Thirteen were back at court on Friday for their 6th attempt at requesting bail. After two months in detention all charges were dropped against one of the thirteen, six were given bail and the other five were remanded in custody to give the police one more chance to bring some evidence against them to the court. The next court date has been set for 11 December 2009. This will be the 7th opportunity given to the police to provide some evidence of guilt.

As usual Jackson Gumede and Yakoob Baig were at the court and openly advising the prosecution. Gumede is the chairperson of the Branch Executive Committee of the ANC in Ward 25 and the man who seized control of the Kennedy Road settlement on 27th September 2009. Baig is the ANC Councillor for Ward 25 who said that ‘harmony’ had been restored after the attack on AbM. He was also at the settlement on 27th September and they both stood by while the homes of the Kennedy Road Development Committee and well known Abahlali baseMjondolo members were systematically demolished. Since the ANC seized control of the settlement extreme intimidation has continued in the settlement, including death threats and threats to demolish more people’s homes. In fact another home was demolished yesterday, on Sunday 30 November. It is a crime to threaten to kill people if they are suspected of not supporting your political party. It is also a crime to demolish someone’s house if they are suspected of not supporting your political party. But these crimes are not investigated. No one is arrested. It is clear that these crimes are carried out with the full support of the local police and the local ANC. Baig and Gumede are, at the very least, complicit with the ongoing and criminal political intimidation in the Kennedy Road settlement. Yet they are able to advise the prosecution. It is clear that the police and the court are there for the ANC and not for the people.

The magistrate said that there would be an investigation as to whether there was an Abahlali meeting before the attack. She made it sound like holding a meeting would be a clear sign of guilt. But of course there was an Abahlali meeting! It was the Abahlali Youth League Camp that was attacked! Will all of us who were at that meeting now qualify to be arrested? Holding meetings is not a crime. It is attacking meetings that is a crime!

We held the Youth League Camp on 26th September to talk about our needs and our own struggle – nothing else. When the camp was attacked we didn’t know why we were being attacked. We didn’t know who was attacking us. The attack was a total surprise and a total shock. All that we knew was that the attackers were saying that they were going to drive the AmamPondo out of the settlement and that they were going to kill the Abahlali leaders.

The police did not come when we called them. When they did come we were so shocked to see that our own comrades were arrested and not the attackers. Then the ANC politicians came to the settlement. They celebrated the attack. They did nothing to stop the demolition of our member’s houses. Willies Mchunu said that ‘Kennedy Road’ had been liberated. It became very clear who our attackers were.

When we went to court to support our comrades there was no doubt as to who had attacked us. The ANC were there with their flag and in their t-shirts to demand that our comrades be denied bail. Everything was clear.

On that first bail hearing we went to court wearing our full Abahlali uniform. We were stopped at the gate. The securities said that they would only accept 10 people in red shirts to enter the court.

So we had a meeting and delegated ten comrades to go inside the court. When they went inside they found that the court was packed with ANC supporters in their t-shirts. When Councillor Yakoob Baig walked into the court he went straight to the state prosecutor. The prosecutor spoke to the police and then the police came straight to our ten comrades in their red shirts and said that the court was too crowded and that they must leave. That was when we realised that the ANC was not only attacking us with drunk men with guns and knives – they were also going to attack us with the court. Every time when we are going to court they are saying that we who are wearing red shirts can’t go inside but that those who are wearing ANC shirts can move freely.

We came with the strategy of not wearing red shirts but we found that the court was still not fair. Even while the court was in session the ANC supporters were shouting, chanting slogans and even swearing. When the Kennedy Thirteen were being brought in and out of the cells the ANC supporters were standing up insulting, intimidating and trying to assault them. Comrade Sam from Arnett Drive and Mama Ngongoma from Siyanda were physically assaulted in the court. The police did nothing. The magistrate said nothing. Everyone knows that you have to be silent in court. If you talk or your phone rings you are immediately made to leave. Those are the rules by which we must respect the court. But the ANC could do what they liked and no action was taken against them.

The ANC supporters would wait for us outside the court and insult, intimidate and threaten to attack us. The police would not defend us. Roland Vernon from Diakonia intervened to defend us despite insults, intimidation and threats to him. The ANC supporters openly say that the ANC instructed them to kill S’bu Zikode and that they will kill him. They have also threatened many other people with death at the court.

According to our understanding a court, any court, must be neutral. But this court is 100% ANC.

From our understanding everyone has the right to be charged within 48 hours if they are arrested but the Kennedy Thirteen spent two months in prison with no clear charge. Even the magistrate said that she only knew the charges on Friday, the 27th of November.

In fact the magistrate only found out who the Kennedy Thirteen really were on Friday. When the Kennedy Thirteen were arrested the ANC said that they were all members of the Safety & Security Committee (they called it ‘the forum’). At the last hearing even the magistrate was saying that most of our comrades are not coming from the Safety & Security. In fact it is only two who are coming from the Safety – the rest are all Abahlali members.

Yakoob Baig and Willies Mchunu submitted letters to the court asking for bail to be denied. S’bu Zikode wrote a letter in response saying that he knows the thirteen and their role in the community, that they are not dangerous and asking for bail to be granted. The prosecution said that Zikode’s letter must not count because he is no longer a leader. The magistrate repeated this saying that Zikode is no longer President of the Poor because he is no longer living in Kennedy Road. She said nothing about why he had to leave Kennedy Road, why his house was demolished or why he still can’t appear in public in Durban. We want to make it clear that we are poor people and that Zikode is our president.

We as organised shackdwellers want the remaining five comrades to be released. They have been to court six times and the police have failed to bring any evidence against them and to make any case against them. It is not right to detain people when there is no evidence against them.

The Kennedy Thirteen were not treated right in prison. Even their visitors were treated badly. The prison guards would make us wait for hours and hours to see them and then they would only let us see them for two minutes. There wasn’t even time to say Sawubona. You just had to throw the food in the cell and then go. We are worried about how the remaining five will be treated in prison. We are worried about their families.

We want a proper investigation – an investigation that is neutral, that only has the purpose of searching for the truth. We will reject any investigation that is an ANC investigation that only has the purpose of sending the organised poor back to the dark corners of our country – back to silence, back to weakness, back to rule by councillors, back to evictions, back to transit camps, back to rural areas, back to darkness, back to wasting our lives in water queues, back to fires, back to development organised through the barrel of a gun and not negotiation.

After another of our comrades had his home in Kennedy Road destroyed in bright sunlight yesterday we went to the police and we insisted that we must be allowed to lay a charge. For two months the police have not allowed us to lay charges in response to the Kennedy Road attacks and the destruction and looting of homes that followed the attack. But S’bu Zikode has now succeeded in opening a case into the destruction of his home. It is case number: 380/11/2009 Abahlali baseMjondolo has been very encouraged that an officer from the Inanda police station will be investigating this case and others who have lost their homes will be encouraged to also try to lay charges. We invite the media to monitor the investigation of this case. We all need to educate ourselves about the political realities of our country.

All we want is justice.

For further information and comment please contact:

Mama Mkhize 076 579 6198 (isiZulu)
Mazwi Nzimande 074 222 8601 (English/isiZulu)
Mama Nxumalo 076 333 9386 (isiZulu)

Olwasemijondolo lungenelelwe yiBandla lamaSheshi

http://www.isolezwe.co.za/index.php?fArticleId=5266707

Olwasemijondolo lungenelelwe yiBandla lamaSheshi

November 30, 2009 Edition 1

CELANI SIKHAKHANE

ABEBANDLA lamaSheshi KwaZulu-Natal bathi bazosungula uphenyo oluzimele ngezigameko zokuhlaselwa kwabahlali basemijondolo yakuKennedy Road.

Leli bandla likusho lokhu ngemuva kokuzwakalisa ukunganeliseki ngendlela amaphoyisa aqhuba ngayo uphenyo ngokubulawa kwabantu okwenzeke ezinyangeni ezimbalwa kuleya mijondolo .

UMbhishobhi waleli bandla, uRuben Phillip, uthe ngenxa yokunganeliseki ngokuphenya kwamaphoyisa, sebethathe isinqumo sokuba bazisungulele bona uphenyo oluzimele noluzocacisa kabanzi ngokuhlukumezeka kwabantu kuleya mijondolo .

NgoLwesihlanu abebandla lamaSheshi namaWeseli bahlangane kule mijondolo ngenhloso yokuhambisa umkhuleko nokuyobheka isimo njengoba kube nezigameko zokuhlaselwa kwabantu.

“Okusiphatha kabi wukuthi amaphoyisa akhombisa ukuba ngasohlangothini lukahulumeni. Lokhu kwenza nabantu bagcine bengasawethembi ngoba akukho akwenzile ukubavikela yingakho nathi siyibandla sesithathe isinqumo sokusungula uphenyo oluzimele olungahlangani nalolu lukahulumeni,” kuchaza uPhillip.

Uthe ukuhlukumezeka kwabantu baku-Kennedy Road akuzange kuthinte abantu baKwaZulu-Natal kuphela kodwa ngisho izinhlangano zamazwe aphesheya kwezilwandle zikhombisa okukhu-lu ukuzwelana nabahlali bakuleya ndawo.

Kuwona lo mkhuleko abahlali baphinde bakhomba ngenjumbane amakhansela ngezigemegeme zakuleya mijondolo.

Abahlali basola amakhansela ngokuthi abahlanganyela namaphoyisa nokwenza bangabe besawathemba ngoba awakhombisi ukuba sohlangothini lwabo.

UMbhishobhi wamaWeseli eThekwini, uMichael Voster, uthe isenzo samaphoyisa ngabantu bakuKennedy Road sibuyisa isithombe esibi sangezikhathi zobandlulo lapho amaphoyisa ayeba ngasohlangothini lukahulumeni .

“Kusiphatha kabi ukuthi namanje amaphoyisa kusekhona izikhathi lapho ekhombisa ukuvikela umbuso esikhundleni sokuvikela abantu ababuthaka. Abantu bakule mijondolo bahlukumezeke kakhulu kusuka behlaselwa kubulawa nezihlobo zabo ngakho bekungalindelekile ukuthi bazithole sebecindezelwa ngisho nangamaphoyisa okuyiwona abathembele kuwo,” kubeka uVoster owangena ezicathulweni zikaBishop Purity Malinga.

Uthe nakuba uhulumeni wakwaZulu-Natal ekhombisa ukungayeseki inhlangano, Abahlali Basemjondolo, kodwa bona bengamabandla bazoyeseka kuze kube sekugcineni.

Phambilini abahlali baku-Kennedy bake bakhomba ngenjumbane i-ANC ngokuhlaselwa kwabo kodwa le nhlangano yaphumela obala yaziqhelelanisa nakho konke eyayimataniswa nakho okungalungile.

I-ANC yakubeka kwacaca ukuthi nayo iyingxenye yokuthola isixazululo sokukhulula abantu bakuleya mijondolo kanti yaphinde yanxusa uhulumeni nomasipala ukuba alusukumele udaba lwakamuva lokubulawa kwabantu bakule mijondolo.

Ubuholi namakhansela bayichithile imibiko yokuthi kukhona ukwenzelela ngophenyo oluqhubekayo olwenziwa ngamaphoyisa kule ndawo.

‘Produce the evidence’, demands Bishop Rubin Phillip

28 November 2009
Diakonia Council of Churches

‘Produce the evidence’, demands Bishop Rubin Phillip

Anglican Bishop Rubin Phillip has demanded that the state provides evidence in the case against the Kennedy Road 13, or release the accused.

Bishop Rubin Phillip was addressing about fifty people, mostly church leaders and family members of the Kennedy 13, who had gathered for a prayer service organised by Diakonia Council of Churches, at the Durban Magistrates’ Courts.

In a moving speech Bishop Rubin said, “What we are demanding from the state is that they provide the evidence that these men did wrong. If they did indeed do anything wrong, then prosecute them. If there is no evidence, release them now.”

Bishop Rubin, who is known for his relentless defence of justice in KwaZulu-Natal, also announced the establishment of a commission of enquiry into the Kennedy Road events which, he
said, would comprise “high powered legal professionals” and notable citizens with impeccable track records, as well as distinguished international experts. The objective of the commission would be to establish the truth. “The name of Abahlali has been darkened and tarnished. Abahlali’s reputation must be vindicated”, he said.

Addressing the gathering, Revd Solomuzi Mabuza, Chairperson of the Church Land Programme, implored the church not to give up its prophetic role. “We believe in a God of justice. Let us not be afraid to speak the truth to power”, he said.

After the service, clergy and family members of the accused filled the court room for the bail hearing, sitting through the lengthy proceedings which were interrupted by a forty five minute adjournment. After the long and unjustified delay in bringing specific charges against the thirteen accused, charges were dropped against one, while the charge of murder against seven were also dropped. Five of the accused will appear again on 11 December, allowing the state time for further investigations, and bail was denied these five.

The service was followed by a time of prayer with families of the accused and members of Abahlali baseMjondolo who had attended the proceedings in solidarity with the accused. Prayers were led by Revd Phumzile Zondi-Mabizela, CEO of the KwaZulu-Natal Christian Council.

Diakonia urges all our friends and partners – who have shared the struggle for our hard-won democracy – to continue praying for the accused in their time of need.

We Want the Full Loaf (not just a child support grant)

Presentation at the Development Action Group Workshop
Cape Town, 18 November 2009

by Mnikelo Ndabankulu

We Want the Full Loaf (not just a child support grant)

The Slums Act

The Slums Act first came to our ears as a Bill in 2006. The information about this Bill came to us indirectly through our sources.

It was clear that we needed to discuss this Bill as Abahlali. M’du Hlongwa and I both went to the Government Communications to ask a copy. We had two copies and we shared these copies and we analysed the Bill. We had a number of meetings where we read the Bill together going one line by one line.

Before we could get into the Bill the name of the Bill was already frustrating us as it talked about shack settlements as ‘Slums’. Yes our communities are under developed and they need development. That is obvious. But they are not ‘slums’. A slum is a place where there there is nothing good, where there is no survival. We immediately thought that it is wrong to call our communities ‘slums’. We immediately thought that the government must recognise that our settlements are communities – communities that are underdeveloped due to neglect by the government – and that they need to be developed by that same government. They need to be made formal – not to be eradicated.

When we got into the Bill we found that it contradicts with the Constitution. It was taking away the small rights that the shack dwellers have. PIE protects us against evictions. Section 26 of the Constitution protects us against evictions. Not all evictions can be stopped with PIE and Section 26 but most can be stopped because almost all evictions are illegal.

We were not impressed that while we were having little rights these little rights were now being taken away from us. This Bill was taking us from little to nothing.

This Bill was making it a criminal offence to resist evictions whereas the Constitution allows us to resist. This Bill would mandate five years in prison or a R20 000 fine for resisting an eviction. No shack dweller can afford R20 000. If you are arrested and jailed for raising your concern about your right to keep living where you are you are then you are not living in a democracy. Nobody in their sober senses would just fold their arms, clap their hands or ululate while their home is destroyed. Therefore this Bill would make all shack dwellers to be criminals.

We saw that the Bill would also be an attack on backyard dwellers, on those who have utilised unused formal houses. The Bill was putting too much pressures on the owners of unused land and vacant houses that had been occupied to get rid of people. It was forcing the land and house owners to evict people. One clause said that landowners must make sure that their land is protected by fences and security personnel. Not all landowners are happy that we have occupied their land but they were forced by the Constitution to accept our occupation.

At that time we were already being evicted by the Municipality but those evictions were illegal. We were having good success in stopping them by going to court. We saw that this Act would give the Municipality a stand to justify their evictions – to make what was illegal become legal.

At that time the Municipality was already taking people to transit camps. We had already discovered that they are very, very bad compared to the structures that we have built ourselves. They are very bad compared to the communities that we have made ourselves. The transit camps are built in a train style. There is one wall to separate you from your neighbour. If he is a drunkard you will suffer too. People are very badly affected.

The Bill wanted to make transit camps lawful and to force our eviction to these camps. It did not specify where the transit camps would be. You might be here in Sydenham but find that you are taken to Chatsworth, to a place that you don’t know. Forced removals destabilise workers, schoolers and congregants.

When we settled in these areas, when we chose these areas those areas that the government is planning to force us to were there too. But those areas were last on our list. In fact they were not even on our list. Chatsworth and Verulum were always there but we didn’t choose them for a reason, for a good reason. We will always reject any programme of reruralisation.

For all these reasons we nicknamed the Slums Bill as the South African Operation Murambatsvina.

We saw that our citizenship would expire as soon as this Bill was passed.

We decided to tell the government that on the analysis of the organised poor this Bill was anti-poor. We decided to tell the government that they must implement their Breaking New Ground policy because it is more pro-poor.

Our opposition to the Bill was widely known. The government had to have a public hearing and they decided to have it at Kennedy Road so that they could say that we had agreed to it. Lennox Mabaso [at the time the spokesperson for the then MEC for Housing in the Province, Mike Mabuyakhulu] sms’d [S’bu] Zikode to say that they were coming to Kennedy. The day of the hearing came. They first sent a police helicopter. It was flying very low over the settlement from early in the morning. Then they sent in many, many police. Then ANC and SANCO supporters came in Municipal buses. Then the the politicians came in a long line of big cars.

The ANC and SANCO supporters were told that they were being taken to register for houses. For this reason the government’s own supporters were very frustrated at being told one thing while in fact the agenda for the meeting was different.

Only Abahlali could contest the government officials because we were the only ones that had read the Bill. But the protocol was very strict. You were only allowed to speak if you could quote from a sub-section of the Bill first but they didn’t give copies of the Bill to anyone.

The reason why the Municipality could pass its electricity policy in 2001 that denies electricity to shack dwellers and condemns us to fire is that in those days there were no vocal organisations like Abahlali. Without Abahlali the Slums Act would have walked free.

We criticised the Bill very heavily that day despite their attempts to suppress us with protocol. One politician invited us to parliament to debate the Bill there. We went there, to Pietermaritzburg. When we got there we found Mabuyakhulu reading the Bill like a Pastor in church. There was no opportunity for questions. Then we were told to go out for lunch and that we could debate the Bill after lunch. But when we came back in they just said that the Act is passed and everyone clapped. The opposition parties were not interested and did not oppose the Bill. Immediately the media were phoning us and asking for comment. We were still waiting for the debate and were caught by surprise.

We walked out of the parliament and we told our comrades what had happened. It was decided to call our legal experts. We put our proposal on the table which was that they should take this Act to court because it was violating the Constitution. They listed to us and said that they would check if this was a winnable battle and then report back to us. They reported that the battle was winnable and we filed the papers.

At first it was proposed that Judge Nicholson would hear the case. But at the last minute Judge Vuka Tshabalala decided to take the case. We wondered about the independence of the judicial system. We know that he is a big comrade of the ruling party.

At the Durban High Court the lawyers of the government presented their side of the story. Vuka Tshabalala listened well and even encouraged them from time to time. When it come to the turn of our lawyers to speak Vuka Tshabalala would attack our lawyers. He wouldn’t listen and he wouldn’t let them speak. Sometimes he would sleep for 20 minutes. Once he took the last sip of water from his glass, fell asleep, then woke up and tried to drink the same water again. Even the man who says ‘Silence in the Court’ laughed. A man who had to take a serious decision on people’s lives slept in the court. We were not happy. That is why we called him Lala Tshabalala.

Once the decision came that we had lost the battle the government were too excited talking everywhere about a ‘landmark decision’. We told our members that they mustn’t worry. That they must wait and see who will have the last laugh. We told our people we had options – the court of appeal or the Constitutional Court. We decided to go to the Constitutional Court – straight to the Cup Final.

We filed our papers and we went to the Constitutional Court. We went to the court in two buses and a taxi. We travelled the whole night. When we arrived there the way that we were treated made us feel that we are still citizens of this nation. We were given water. There were video screens for those who could not fit into the court. Our own independent media were allowed into the court with their cameras. We were happy with the way that the judges attacked both legal teams. It was very fair. And our lawyers could respond very well to all the questions from the judges. The government lawyers could not respond to all the questions. They even moved out before the hearing was over. They were already surrendering because they could feel the heat. On the basis of our own assesment of the court proceedings we were confident that we would be enjoying a victory. Everybody was confident. The Mail & Guardian wrote an article called ‘Shack dwellers’ victory bus’.

We were told to wait for three months. Three months came and we heard nothing. We kept on discussing. We were concerned that Pius Langa was retiring. Personally I expected Dikgang Moseneke to take over as it was clear that he is the best judge. But Sandile Ngcobo was appointed. I was worried. I don’t call him a judge. I call him a comrade judge [a comrade of the ANC]. We were worried that comrade judges would not be ready to embarrass their comrades.

But when we were called back to the court Langa, Moseneke and Ngcobo were all there. The judgment was overdue but the result was great for Abahlali. We were not surprised. We expected victory because we knew that on this matter the Constitution was on our side. If we had lost we were going to just burn the constitution document outside the court.

Section 16 was found inconsistent with the Constitution. This was also our analysis at the very beginning. The government was told to pay all legal costs. The costs were around R250 000. I wished that the money could come from the salaries of Mabuyakhulu, Mabaso and [then Minister of Housing Lindiwe] Sisulu who all endorsed the Act and congratulated themselves so highly after Lala Tshabalala’s judgment.

The perpetrators should suffer – not the people who pay their taxes to the state. That money is the people’s money.

It was not just an Abahlali victory. It was a national victory as all provinces were planning similar Acts.

We will always appreciate those church leaders, academics, legal experts and activists that stood on our side during the darkness of this Act through to the brightness of our victory. We will always salute these people.

A few weeks after our court victory against the Slums Act we made a big celebration in the Richmond Farm transit camp where victims of the Act have been staying in a tin town. We buried these kinds of communities when we buried the Slums Act and so we had to celebrate our victory with the victims of this Act. We couldn’t take the Constitutional Court to the people but we could take the celebration to the people.

The Kennedy Road Attacks

The Kennedy Road attacks puts the faith of the democracy of the Republic of South Africa on a water bridge. We can’t guarantee the reality of the theoretical democracy that we are told that we are living in.

We do know for a fact that the attacks on the Abahlali office, the KRDC [Kennedy Road Development Committee] members and the Abahlali leaders living in Kennedy Road were planned by the ruling party.

It is a fact that since Abahlali commenced in 2005 the ruling party and the local ANC activists at ward level couldn’t get hold of the Kennedy Road community.

Many people, including ruling party members, had to dance to the Abahlali tune because it was meaningful to the people – even to them. Abahlali was speaking about their real concerns – about water, electricity, houses, land and the right to remain in the city. The political party resolutions are always too far from the people. Abahlali was of the people, by the people and for the people and therefore always very close to the people. The politics of land and housing is a living politics. It is a people’s politics and the people knew exactly what they were fighting for.

Councillor Baig was not happy with the success of Abahlali and the failure of his party’s reputation. In 2005 Obed Mlaba said ‘never mind about the mushrooming movement it will be nowhere to be found after the elections.’ Four years later we were much stronger. We were not a mushroom but a big river that gets stronger as it gets closer to the sea.

The government was forced to sit down with us and to make meaningful engagement. In the end we signed a Memorandum of Understanding to provide services to 14 settlements and to upgrade three where they were via Breaking New Ground. It was a historic breakthrough.

But then the Slums Act victory made some politicians to be very angry. We were the first community organisation in KZN to take the government to the Constitutional Court. Questions remained in the party: “Who do these people think they are?”. It was decided that: “They must be sorted out!”.

A strategy was made to make the people in Kennedy Road to fight each other. Most of the KRDC have lived in Kennedy Road for twenty years or longer. They were all elected. Everyone who is elected can be recalled if there is a problem by making an emergency AGM and holding new elections. But someone came and told some people that the elected committee, their neighbours, were now people that must be killed.

We feel very sorry for people who can be used in this way – people who don’t know who their real enemy is. The ANC were prepared to participate in any project to destroy Abahlali and to teach its leaders a lesson. In the end the project that they chose was a Pondo/Zulu tribal war.

Zulufication was inspired by Polokwane and the mobilisation for a 100% Zulu boy. Many people were happy with this. These people started to label those Zulus who didn’t support Zulufication as spies or sell outs. They prepared for a political war between COPE and the ANC. All targetted people were called COPE. All independent movements, like Abahlali, were labelled as COPE so that they could be attacked.

And the decision by the Safety & Security Committee to make ten o’clock the closing time on the shebeens – a decision take to reduce tribal tensions that are escalated by alcohol abuse, gave the ANC the opportunity to mobilise the shebeen owners against the KRDC. They were very strategic to make the shebeen owners to support their attack. The sheebeen owners fought against the community for their own interests. But the question of shebeen closing times was not the real issue.

The real politics is clearly revealed in the fact that Pres [S’bu Zikode] and Vice [Mashumi Figlan] have never been members of the Safety & Security Committee and they were also attacked.

And anyone who was not happy with the Safety & Security Committee could have requested a quick AGM to elect a new committee. There was no reason to kill the volunteers. Why didn’t they elect a new committee? It is because they were making a political attack.

The Drop-in-Centre served thousands of people with Aids and other sick people too. It is not operating any more. The crèche was operating on behalf of parents so that their children would be safe and educated while they were at work. It is not operating any more. The hall is not being looked after any more. There is long grass growing around it now. There could be snakes and other wild reptiles there. The library is gone.

After the attack the ANC said that it was not right that people had to go through the KRDC to get the hall for marriages and funerals. They were forgetting that the KRDC was elected every year and that they must maintain and clean and secure the hall. They must fix the broken windows, cut the grass, buy cleaning equipment and get paint and chairs. There is nothing wrong with asking people to make a small payment to use the hall for marriages and funerals. This is where the KRDC got the money to run the hall so that it was kept in a good condition for the whole community.

The really killers are left free and their victims are in jail. The Kennedy 13 are the same people whose houses were vandalised. The house of Zikode was demolished after the Kennedy Road 13 were arrested. The really perpetrators were never arrested.

As soon as Abahlali was chased out the ruling party moved in and launched its own committee. That fact shows clearly that the target was for the ruling party to take over Kennedy Road. That was the ultimate goal. They will regret what they have done when the truth comes out through the independent enquiry that we are calling for. We are confident that the truth will be revealed in this enquiry.

Now the police have attacked our people in Pemary Ridge. The police will always attack us when they think that we are weak. They will only respect us when they can see that we are strong. They take shack dwellers as nothing. We are their playground.

After the attacks in Kennedy Road there was solidarity from many organisations, NGOs and activists. They all condemned the attacks. But my evaluation shows that international solidarity is more than local solidarity. We are not forgetting the efforts of the the church leaders who have gone to court with us, the students that have picketed, the academics that have signed petitions. We really appreciate their support and we won’t forget it. But these efforts are still less than the international solidarity. Our international friends picketed South African embassies in England, in New Zealand and in America.

So we call on those people who claim to be pro-poor to act pro-poor. We call on local activists and organisations to take a stand. In a situation like the one that we are in now everyone must make their choice and stick with it. You are either on the side of the oppressed or you are on the side of the oppressors. You are either with the government or you are with the people. We do not like people who will not take a side. Everyone must take a side.

We appreciate solidarity and we would appreciate support to continue to us and to other oppressed organisations.

The Full Loaf

We have taken one victory and suffered one defeat. But we will keep going. No one ever said that struggle is easy.

We have always been clear about our struggle. Every person is a person and every person must count the same. This is obvious. But we do not count. Therefore we have to be out of the order that oppresses us. We have to rebel. Everyone must have the full loaf of bread that each person needs to live well. Service delivery is just trying to keep the people happy with one slice of bread when in fact a person needs the whole loaf. It is the same with human rights. Having the human right to a house is not the same as having a house. Of course if you don’t have any bread then you must struggle for that one slice. But our struggle does not stop there. After you have won one slice you struggle for the next slice up until you have the whole loaf. Only then can you relax. Our struggle is not only for service delivery or human rights. Our struggle is for the full loaf. It is important that this is clear to everybody.

Thank you.