Stop the lying and the bullying

1 June 2007

On the 9th of May, the Witness had an article about the “notorious city building Akoo’s Flats” being demolished. Everyone whose voice was listened to in that article praised the new owner of the building, the ‘developer’ Mr Andrew Barnes, for getting rid of this “filthy, structurally unsound building” that was an “eyesore. It was a wreck.” Two days later, Daniel Bailey who works for the Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions (COHRE), had a letter published in the Witness asking about the evicted residents – people who were actually invisible in the original Witness story. In Daniel’s letter he pointed at that “the residents of the flats lived there not because they wanted too (who would want to live in dangerous conditions?) but because this was all they could afford. Where in our city is there affordable accommodation for poor people deriving a livelihood in the CBD? There is none.”

The ward councillor, Mr Green, reacted to this letter straight away defending the demolitions and evictions. Green wrote: “Perceptions are sometimes more real than the truth, but anyone who wants to make a statement about a hearsay matter should verify the information or rumour before taking action. A demolition permit was issued by municipal officials in terms of safety and health issues. All the residents from Akoo’s Flats were satisfactorily relocated with the assistance of the developer. As the ward councillor, I facilitated several meetings with the residents and the developer to achieve a proverbial win-win outcome for everyone concerned”. The first part of Green’s letter is really a polite way of accusing Daniel Bailey of lying – “Perceptions are sometimes more real than the truth, but anyone who wants to make a statement about a hearsay matter should verify the information or rumour before taking action”. Well, we are the people who were living in the rooms of the house – it was called ‘The White House’ – that was demolished next to the flats in the same operation. This house was also owned by Akoo and and sold to Barnes. Like the flats, this house also gave shelter to poor people in the city. We are very angry about the lying. The lying is not coming from Daniel Bailey. The lying is done by the business people and the councillors. Here is the truth of what has happened to us.

In late November last year, Mr Andrew Barnes was introduced to us as the new owner of the buildings. About a month later, a man called Sam, who works for him, came to announce that he wants no-one living there anymore and that he is giving us one month to get out. He said he doesn’t need our rents and he is already paying for water which is leaking everywhere and he is going to shut the water off. Still during December, he came with some sort of letter demanding that everyone must sign to say when they are going to leave. Only one of us was there when he came at that time, and so she refused to sign that letter. It was just before the holiday time and the residents really pleaded not be kicked out at such a time. Mr Barnes had threatened to bring machines to knock the whole place down and so we were very scared of having no place to stay and we worried about our belongings that were there. That is why we all returned early on the 27th and 28th of December. We must state very clearly that in all this time no-one ever spoke to us about alternatives for accomodation at all. Instead the next thing that happened was that workers arrived to destroy our places. First they demolished the old swimming pool that was there, and then they started on the outbuildings. They were very threatening and shouted at us women, “Hamba ‘bafazi”. Mr Barnes himself went from room to room, kicking the doors right down, calling for the people who were living there. One of the people living there is a Malawian. Maybe because he is a ‘foreigner’ whose rights are not respected, he was the most scared by this intimidation and he ran away first. But all of us were affected badly. Under these conditions, when the owner of your house is there kicking down your doors and smashing down the buildings, it is not really possible to continue to live there! What made it even more impossible was that Mr Barnes told the people that they can just come and take the door frames and the windows away – so of course these all went very quickly which makes it impossible to live in a place that.

We are very angry. We were abused and our children were abused. One of us was told about what was happening when my young child come running and crying to where I was working nearby to tell me about an umlungu who was breaking down the doors and shouting. Even when we talked about this now, we cried again. That little girl of mine is still badly affected. Every time she sees a white man, in a car or a van driving near to us, she cries and hides in fear. What has happened is not right at all. Maybe if someone is the owner of a building and they want to take it, then they can do that. But they can surely do this in a nice way? It is not necessary to abuse and initimidate people. It is a hard life for the poor. We are not just sitting around with lots of spare time doing nothing so that we can easily go and find an alternative accomodation near to the city where can make some sort of a living. Some of us who were at Akoo’s and the White House have had to go back to family homes far away from jobs and schools. Others of us have found spaces to rent for a short time in the shacks near the city. To rent a room or a flat in the city is too expensive for the people – it costs something like a thousand rands. So really, there are no alternatives for us.

Mr Green says that residents were “satisfactorily relocated with the assistance of the developer”. He says that “As the ward councillor, I facilitated several meetings with the residents and the developer to achieve a proverbial win-win outcome for everyone concerned”. Definitely, for us from the White House, there were no meetings to talk with us about the evictions; there were no discussions about relocation; and maybe there was win for the councillor and a win for the developer, but we have lost a lot and we have got no compensation, no assistance and no apology. We know that certainly some of the people in Akoo’s Flats were given money by Mr Barnes to go away. Afterwards we heard him telling someone that the people in the White House – that is us – went voluntarily but the people in the block of flats were difficult and I (Mr Barnes) had to pay them money for them to leave. Well, firstly it is not true that we went on our own – we were forced out. And secondly, bribing some people is not the same as being fair and just.

We think that Mr Barnes has made a big mistake. He forgets that, just because we are poor, we are not stupid. We have seen the newspaper article and we have seen councillor Green’s letter lying on behalf of Mr Barnes. We want our story to be known now as well. We have met actually with Daniel Bailey who wrote that letter and now we are sure that our rights have been ignored and that was done to us was illegal. Some of us have lived in Akoo’s buildings for 8 years and we have rights under the law. The only documents we got were letters from Mr Barnes’ private company but there was no proper eviction order granted by a court of law; there was no sherriff there when our things were removed; no suitable alternative accomodations were discussed or offered. The next time Mr Barnes wants to talk to us, he can talk to our lawyers.

A group of former residents of the ‘White House’.

*********************************************

After this article was published in The Witness the newspaper ran the following editorial:

Giving a voice
http://www.witness.co.za/default.asp?myAction=detail&myRef=53121&myCat=opinion

A crucial task of the media in a democratic society is to publicise the plight of ordinary citizens faced with the unreasonable exercise of power, whether by government or business. This week?s story in The Witness putting the other side of the saga involving the demolition in Pietermaritzburg of Akoo?s Flats and a neighbouring house is a case in point.

The evicted tenants emphasised that while they might be poor, they are not stupid. They are also capable of reading the newspaper and, indeed, contributing to it. As a result, a more rounded and complete picture of events has now been offered. It is clear that at least some of the occupants of the two buildings were subjected to a forced removal that belonged more to the apartheid era than to a democracy and had little respect for people?s human rights and dignity.

Defenders of media freedom are sometimes regarded with exasperation. The press is often criticised for its conduct, sometimes with justification, but it has earned the description of the fourth estate for good reasons. Without it, people would lose a significant part of their defence against the unilateral actions of the powerful and the rich. This may be too late for the inhabitants of Akoo?s Flats, but coverage of their experience could prevent a repetition.

In the hierarchy of rights, freedom of information is generally relegated to a third tier behind civil, political and socio-economic matters. But without it, the people will never govern and democracy will remain an unfulfilled hope.

Published: 15 June 2007