Preliminary observations as of 24 April 2007 by the United Nations Special Rapporteur on adequate housing, Mr. Miloon Kothari in light of his mission to South Africa
(12 April – 24 April 2007)
1. Introduction

The Special Rapporteur’s mission to South Africa was conducted upon the invitation of the Government of the Republic of South Africa and was prepared in close cooperation with relevant ministries, particularly the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Housing, the Regional Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights for Southern Africa and civil society organizations.

During his visit, the Special Rapporteur was able to visit urban and rural areas such as Platfontein (Nothern Cape), Sterkwater, Ga-Pila and Mothlohlo (Limpopo), Johannesburg, Ekurhuleni (Gauteng), Durban (KwaZulu Natal) and Cape Town (Western Cape).

The Special Rapporteur met with high-level representatives at State, Provincial and Municipal level including the Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs; Minister of Agriculture and Land Affairs, Judges of the Constitutional Court; Members of the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Housing; Deputy Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development; Chairperson and Members of the South African Human Rights Commission; the Chief Land Claims Commissioner; Director-General of Finance of the Ministry of Finance and Directors of Department of Housing at all levels and other high ranking officials.

The Special Rapporteur also met with civil society members, including NGOs, social movements, academics and women’s groups. He was very impressed by the level of competence and dedication of work these women and men towards the enjoyment of the right to adequate housing for all. The Special Rapporteur appreciates the extensive efforts made by both government officials and civil society groups that facilitated the meeting with a wide range of affected persons.

Throughout his mission, the Special Rapporteur took testimonies from people directly affected by the shortcoming in the implementation of the human right to an adequate housing including Indigenous peoples, persons experiencing homelessness, domestic violence victims and those that are currently threatened with forced evictions.
2. Positive Aspects

The progress towards democratisation that South Africa has made since the end of the apartheid in 1994, and the genuine attempts by law and policy makers to address issues of racial segregation, inequality and systematic human rights violations has to be acknowledged. The Special Rapporteur is also aware of the many challenges faced by municipalities as they cope with rapid urbanisation.

In particular, South Africa is one of the few countries that has made a legislative and constitutional commitment to the recognition and protection of socio-economic rights including the right to access to adequate housing as contained in sections 25 (1) and (2) of the South African Constitution. Since 1996, the South African Constitutional Court has been called upon to interpret this right in a number of landmark decisions. Importantly, these decisions have reinforced the justiciability not just of housing rights, but a number of socio-economic rights. In particular, the court’s decision in Grootboom that the state is constitutionally required to directly assist people living in crisis and emergency conditions has done much to promote the right to housing not just in South Africa, but around the world.

South Africa has also been active at the international level in supporting mechanisms that seek to enhance the protection of economic, social and cultural rights including support for the development of an Optional Protocol to the International Covenant of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

The realisation of the right to access to adequate housing is crucial to the positive development of South Africa and its people. During his visit the Special Rapporteur was impressed by a number of housing and land initiatives designed to help secure an adequate standard of living for all South Africans. For example, the Special Rapporteur was impressed by housing delivery under the National Housing Subsidy Scheme (‘NHSS’) that since 1994 has financed the construction of over 2.4 million households.

The Special Rapporteur was also impressed by the National Department of Housing’s ambitious policy, ‘Breaking New Ground’, which seeks to promote sustainable human settlement and cites a commitment to housing projects and developments that are socially inclusive and integrated.

In addition to Breaking New Ground, many policies have been developed at the provincial and municipal level. During conversations with officials that examined these policies and their attendant implementation challenges, the Special Rapporteur was encouraged by the frankness with which government officials discussed the challenges for adequate housing and associated rights in South Africa.

The Special Rapporteur also welcomes the establishment of the South African Human Rights Commission, a National Human Rights Institution in accordance with the Paris Principles, and the Commission’s focus on economic, social and cultural rights. The Special Rapporteur was also impressed by the commitment of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and individuals that continue to work with determination and hope for the development of truly democratic South Africa that protects and respects the right of all South Africans to an adequate standard of living.

3. Obstacles
Unfortunately, it is apparent that, notwithstanding legal protections and policies, many South Africans continue to suffer poverty, exclusion and isolation with over 45% of the population living below the poverty line as defined by the UNDP. Blacks constitute the poorest percentage of the population, making up for over 90% of the 21.9 million poor as estimated by the UNDP’s Human Development Report.
3.1 Implementation and Responsibility

The Special Rapporteur observed that the progressive realisation of access to adequate housing in South Africa is compromised by the fragmented governmental approach to the implementation of housing law and policy. While well-intentioned policies have been developed at national level, few mechanisms are in place to ensure that these polices are being implemented. Nor does it seem that there is any comprehensive evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses of housing law and policy, including housing delivery that has already taken place, at any level of government.

The Special Rapporteur learnt that since the end of apartheid, more than 2.4 million houses have been delivered by 2007 under the NHSS. This is a significant number. However, the success of housing delivery cannot be measured only by quantity but needs to take into consideration the location of housing, the quality of the housing and accessibility to water, sanitation, electricity as well as schools, hospitals and other civic services. This is essential to ensure the implementation and the indivisibility of a human rights approach.

These deficits are exacerbated by the failure at local, provincial and national level to properly reflect and evaluate how their housing and land distribution programmes are meeting the needs of the poor. The Special Rapporteur is not aware whether a national audit has been conducted to evaluate whether the distribution and quality of housing has been properly managed since the implementation of the NHSS.

The Special Rapporteur visited a number of housing settlements throughout the country where he saw new houses that had been hastily constructed, poorly planned and designed in the absence of any consultation between local authorities and residents. These houses were clearly inadequate to meet the housing needs of their inhabitants. For example, in Wallesdene, the site of the landmark Grootboom decision, the Special Rapporteur met with a household that had received a one- bedroom RDP dwelling to house a family of eight. Such inadequacies are partly caused by a housing delivery policy that is based on the concept of a ‘household’ rather than on human need.

It is also apparent to the Special Rapporteur that the policies set out in Breaking New Ground have not been practically adopted by many authorities at the provisional and local level.
3.2 National Housing Law and Policy and Forced Evictions

South Africa’s constitutional commitment to the right to access adequate housing and the numerous legislations that seek to protect this right, underscore the government’s recognition of the importance of adequate housing. The right to access to adequate housing contained in the Constitution provides that the state must ‘take reasonable legislative and other measures to achieve the progressive realisation of the right’ and makes it unlawful for anyone to be evicted from their home without a court order. It is also makes any legislation that permits arbitrary evictions unlawful. A number of other constitutional provisions including section 28 pertaining to ‘Children’; section 27 pertaining to ‘Water’; section 25 pertaining to equitable access to land and section 9 setting out the right to ‘Equality’ further bolster and complement the right to access to adequate housing.

In addition to these constitutional rights there are a number of national laws and policies that are designed to protect the right to adequate housing including: The Housing Act (107 of 1997); the National Housing Code; and the Prevention of Illegal Eviction from Unlawful Occupation of Land Act 1998 (PIE) which makes it a criminal offence to evict someone without a court order.

Despite this legislative framework, it appears that forced evictions are taking place with regularity throughout South Africa. It is also apparent that these evictions are being executed in clear breach of procedural requirements and through spurious use of ‘urgent eviction’ provisions where evictions are justified on the grounds of the health threat to the occupants. The Special Rapporteur heard from a number of people whose rights had been violated in the following situations:
• Evictions carried out in the middle of the night;
• Property being destroyed during evictions;
• Evictions taking place without prior information being given to evictees and in the absence on any consultation as proscribed by PIE;
• The threat and actual use of violence by for example police and the ‘Red Ants’ as in the case of evictions in Johannesburg; and
• The unavailability of safe and reasonable emergency accommodation post evictions rendering people homeless and at risk of further violation of human rights.

It appears that many evictions are executed in the interest of gentrifying inner urban areas and promoting urban regrowth and development. Particularly, in inner city Johannesburg it seems that the drive to attract private investment has been at the expense of the urban poor who have been living in dilapidated buildings in the inner city close to services and livelihood opportunities for many years.

The Special Rapporteur was also disturbed to learn of proposed amendments to PIE which will have the effect of winding back certain protections. The Special Rapporteur is concerned that any amendments would weaken procedural protections around evictions, increase exemptions for landlords and have the effect of criminalising people facing evictions.

Evictions are not isolated to urban areas. The Special Rapporteur was disturbed to learn of the large number of black farm dwellers that had been evicted or displaced since 1994. One study places the number of those displaced from farms at over 2 million. These evictions have been widespread with devastating impact despite new legislation such as the Extension of Security of Tenure Act (‘ESTA’) and the Land Reform (Labour Tenants) Act (‘LTA’) designed to extend and secure the rights of those who have insecure tenure. The Special Rapporteur heard that the police and relevant prosecuting authorities rarely take the cases brought by farm workers seriously and have, in many cases, refused to prosecute farmers who are in contravention of tenure law.

Backyard shack dwellers throughout South Africa are also victims of insufficient tenure protections. They are evicted as a matter of course if their landlord receives a new house under the NHSS. There is no currently no regulation of this landlord/tenant relationship. However, this relationship will continue to exist and be open to abuse while the housing crisis in South Africa continues.

It is also clear that there is a critical shortage of rental public housing stock for poor people and that market forces are pushing people out of accessible and affordable rental options. Rental stock needs to be revived to include a model that responds to the needs of people in the lowest socio-economic bracket including a comprehensive restructuring of government rental subsidies.

The Special Rapporteur visited residents of San Jose, a 16 storey building in Berea, Johannesburg. San Jose is one of Johannesburg’s ‘bad buildings’ that is said to pose health and safety risks for its residents. Residents of San Jose are currently appealing an eviction order such that they can be protected against removal from the inner city. The Special Rapporteur was alarmed to discover that San Jose residents have been without water and electricity since 2002, necessitating the transport of buckets of water from a single stand pipe on the street, every day and the accumulation of a sewage cesspool in the basement of the building.
Moreover, the Rapporteur was disturbed to learn that the Supreme Court of Appeal has recently ruled in favour of the eviction in spite of the fact that the city failed to provide evidence of where the evicted residents would be temporarily or permanently relocated.

The situation in San Jose appears indicative of a trend to evict people by shutting down basic services including water, sanitation and electricity and forcing people to relocate while the government sidesteps its obligation to provide emergency accommodation. For example, residents of Saratoga Avenue, in inner city Johannesburg, some of who have been living in a compound of makeshift structures for over 30 years, have been without water for 18 months and without electricity for 2 months. Saratoga Avenue residents also told of several police raids that resulted in no arrests, but during which residents were harassed and threatened.
The spate of evictions that are being conducted is at clear odds with the social inclusion and housing integration polices promoted by the Breaking New Ground policy and similar policies developed at provincial and municipal level. Importantly, the evictions and the manner in which they are carried out are also at odds with constitutional obligations and subsequent court judgements.
3.3 Informal Settlements

During his visit, the Special Rapporteur visited a number of informal settlements and was very disturbed to see large numbers of people living in situations of desperation and crisis and without basic human dignity.
Although many municipalities have plans for upgrading and formalising informal settlements inspired by the In-Situ Informal Settlement Upgrading Programme, there is little to suggest that these plans have been implemented. The Special Rapporteur visited a number of informal settlements and saw entire families living in one room without access to even the most of basic of services, including water, electricity and sanitation. Typically these settlements are also situated away from urban centres and therefore away from the services and opportunities that promote social and economic development.

Further, it appears that contrary to the provisions of the National Housing Code, relocation of informal settlements is not being pursued as an option of last resort. Testimonies received from residents of Themblihle in Lenasia illustrate this situation. In 2003, the City of Johannesburg brought an application in the High Court for the eviction of the residents of Themblihle and their relocation to Vlakfontein, 10 km to the south. The eviction was sought on the basis that Themblihle was not safe for development as it is underlain by dolomite formations. An independent study of the risk posed by dolomite in the area showed that while some areas were high-risk, others were low risk and did not prohibit the construction of low cost housing in the area. This study was presented to the local authorities however residents are still facing pressure to relocate.
3.4 Post Settlement Support

Regardless of the origin of new settlements, as a result of large development projects, land restitution claims or the RDP, the Special Rapporteur observed a critical failure of all levels of government to adequately provide post-settlement support. In the vast majority of cases, communities have been left without even the most basic support services including proper sanitation, water, access to schools, access to livelihood options.

The Special Rapporteur observed that after people have been resettled or given new houses, there was very few follow up support mechanisms such as a regular maintenance or service repair. During his visit to Platfontein in the Northern Cape, where a community of 4,000 families of the San indigenous people lives, it was obvious that there was almost no post settlement support since the restitution of the land in 2003. For instance, Platfontein showed construction failures such as problems with leaks in the roof, deficiency of cement floors, critical problems concerning dry sanitation maintenance. A large number of people still do not have water connection within their plot. Residents also testified that they had nowhere to direct their grievances and complaints.
3.5 Large development projects

During his visit to the Limpopo province, the Special Rapporteur had the opportunity to meet communities affected by mining in the area. The Anglo Platinum’s PPL mining company has large projects of extracting platinum and other minerals from the rich soil of the province.

The extracting mine is situated in an area where more than 3000 families have been living. Six thousand people have been removed from their ancestral lands to township areas and there are 10,000 people in the process of being relocated.

In a public meeting the Special Rapporteur received testimonies from community members who were displaced to other lands in order to proceed with the extracting activity. All the testimonies stated that the relocation was done without appropriate consultation or timing information, nor following adequate procedures of relocation. A majority spoke of the use of violence when police broke into the house during the night to carry out the eviction.

The Special Rapporteur had the opportunity to visit Ga-Pila and Mothlohlo, communities under the threat of eviction. These communities face serious health risks caused by exposure to open cast mines and explosions. Twenty-five families, including women and children in Ga-Pila, have been living without water and or electricity for the last 5 years. Although the community had social services in the area, including schools, clinics and churches, that were withdrawn after the mining activity began.

The Special Rapporteur learnt that the government has not provided any assistance at this point to correct this situation, and has not responded to the various memos sent by all the three communities. It appears to the Special Rapporteur that such persistent denial of civil services to the communities can only occur with the complicity of local authorities and the provincial government. This issue needs to be further investigated.

According to information received, it is incumbent upon mining companies to follow procedures to obtain licences for extracting, both on social and economic compliance.
3.6 Consultation and Participation

During his visit the Special Rapporteur observed a critical absence of meaningful consultation between all levels of government and affected individuals and communities. Residents of every type of community spoke with frustration of the lack of information about resettlement and relocation and the denial of the ability to participate in any stage of resettlement planning and implementation. For example, residents from Welldach, Durban, only discovered the location of their resettlement upon arrival at the site.

As noted in Breaking New Ground, programmes aimed at delivering housing and creating sustainable human settlements will only succeed where they are directly informed by the people who they affect, and where they are responsive and targeted to the specific needs of a given community. However this policy has not filtered down to the local decision makers.

Civil society groups spoke with frustration of letters and memos sent to authorities listing grievances and asking for meetings. Most of these attempts to communicate had gone unanswered. Where there has been consultation it has often been done in a tokenistic matter after plans have already been put in place.
3.7 Privatisation of public services

Throughout much of the country the Special Rapporteur observed concerted efforts by South African governments to regenerate its urban areas into ‘world class’ cities and it appears that much progress has been made in this regard, including plans for a new public transport system in Johannesburg that should improve accessibility to inner city employment and education opportunities for those living on the urban peripheries.

However, it is of concern that emphasis on regeneration and development appears to be occurring at the expense of many South Africans who are unable to compete in a housing and service environment that increasingly is dictated by market forces and the principle of cost recovery regardless of human consequences.

The Special Rapporteur observed with concern the large-scale privatisation of public services including basic services such as housing, electricity and water. Not only have the provision of these services been outsourced in the hands of private entities, but there appears to be few accountability and monitoring mechanisms to ensure that private entities are performing their functions in a way that respects policy, law and human rights.

Housing
The Special Rapporteur learnt of trends to outsource the development, provision and monitoring of social housing through companies such as JOSCHO and the Cape Town Community Housing Company. The Special Rapporteur visited Mandelaville which is being upgrading by JOSCHO and observed very poor quality and badly designed housing. Disturbingly, the Special Rapporteur heard that an official building audit of the houses built by the Cape Town Community Housing Company revealed that a number of the houses were so poorly constructed that they are now earmarked for demolition.

Water
South Africa should be commended for its commitment to the realisation of the right water. Access to water is recognised in section 27 of the South African Constitution and South Africa is the only country with a free basic water policy initiated in 2001.

Unfortunately, this policy has critical shortcomings. The free water policy dictates that each household, irrespective of the size of the household should receive 6 KL of water per month. This amount falls well below average water needs as calculated by the WHO of 50KL per individual per month.

In Phiri, a black township within Soweto, the Special Rapporteur met with residents who are bearing the expense of government’s ‘free’ water policy. Since March 2004 Phiri residents have had their water cut off by Johannesburg Water while others have been persuaded to accept prepayment meters as the ‘only’ option available besides total disconnection. All of these residents had previously been supplied with unlimited water for which a flat-rate was levied. With the imposition of the prepayment meters, and because the free basic water amount is insufficient to meet the basic needs of the typically large households in Phiri, residents are often without water for up to two weeks at a time each month because they cannot afford to purchase additional water once the free basic supply is exhausted. The situation is particularly grave for those suffering from HIV/Aids and other diseases when water runs out. An additional amount of water can be made available for emergency situations but only if the person is registered on the indigent register. It is foreseen that this prepayment meter system will be extended to settlements throughout South Africa.

Electricity
The Special Rapporteur acknowledges the improvement that the country has done regarding access to electricity. Whilst only 34% of the population had access to electricity in 1994, this percentage has significantly augmented to 72% of the population in 2007.

Although the national standards for housing delivery provide for access to all basic services including water, sanitation and electricity, the Special Rapporteur observed that large numbers of South Africans still have no access to electricity. For instance, the residents of Mandelaville, an upgraded settlement carried out by JOSHCO in Johannesburg, still have no access to electricity one year after residents have received their new houses. Moreover, houses have been built without connections for electricity.

The approach by government has been to outsource the provision of electricity and it is expected that a similar system to that of the prepaid water meters will be implemented targeting low-income households.
In addition to this, the Special Rapporteur would like to highlight the necessity of affordability tariffs to enable low income households the access to this service. Whilst the cost of the electricity in South Africa seems to be one of the most efficient in the world in terms of cost, rural households are paying five times the price that big companies do to access to electricity.
3.8 Land restitution and rehabilitation

The Special Rapporteur was pleased to see the amount of land that has been redelivered to communities that had been dispossessed during the apartheid era. Ninety per cent of land that had been claimed has already been released.

The Special is pleased to see that administrative mechanisms apart from the judicial system, such as Land Claims Commissioner as well as the development of acquisition land strategies have been set.

Commendable goals have also been set that will achieve redistribution of 30% of white-owned agricultural lands South Africans by 2014. In order to achieve these goals the Special Rapporteur recommends that the 2005 Land Summit’s recommendations should be adopted and implemented without delay, as to mention: Current approaches are not delivering at the scale required in order to achieve this target, State has to assume a stronger role in ensuring accelerating and sustainable land, Need for security of tenure of the land.

However, on the subject of distribution and restitution of the land, the Special Rapporteur would like to remind of the indivisibility of the human rights, in particular the right to enjoy adequate standards of living, which implies not only possessing the land but also having access to the means that enable a full of enjoyment of it. This implies the right to adequate housing, to have a livelihood options and access to education. As stated in the Land Summit’s recommendations, it is not only land and agrarian reform necessary to undo injustices of the past, there must also be a central economic transformation.

In this regards, the Special Rapporteur endorses the recommendation of the need for inclusive partnership in which the government together with social movements, landless people, farmer communities and other actors act together towards agrarian reform.

Besides, in order to successfully realise the land reform and distribution, the Special Rapporteur noted that there is an urgent need for support to the communities at the different stages of the restitution. The Special Rapporteur was shocked by testimonies received by members of a “bush-men” San community from the Kalahari who received a 35.000 hectare land. After receiving the land no post-settlement support or capacity building to ensure sustainable development was provided and they still have no infrastructure, no housing solutions or support to start developing a productive project.

Having high rates of unemployment, low incomes and no subsidies for transport to nearby urban settlements, the lack of support to the community jeopardises the gains that this community has experienced in recovering their lands.

The Special Rapporteur is concerned that recommendations made by the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples following his visit to South Africa in 2005.
3.9 Women and Housing

The Special Rapporteur notes with concern the specific vulnerability of women to inadequate housing; particularly single women, women with children, women within other vulnerable groups (e.g. Indigenous communities, women with disabilities, migrant women) to inadequate housing, and the specific flow-on impacts of inadequate housing on women.

He acknowledges the efforts the government is making at all levels to meet the goal of delivering 30% of the housing stock to women headed households. However, the lack of affordable housing, lack of timely access to public housing, and inadequate government provisions for long term safe housing, particularly in rural areas means that many women are forced to either remain or return to situations of domestic violence, and continue to live in inadequate housing where they risk the safety of their children and themselves. This increases a woman’s vulnerability to domestic violence and HIV/Aids.

The Special Rapporteur heard that one in three South African women suffers from some form of abuse. There is an urgent and critical lack of support, most of which is addressed to women in immediate crisis and are unable to offer medium or long-term support. It appears that there is real need for political will to reverse the very serious violations women suffer from on a daily basis.

The Special Rapporteur was appalled to hear of a case where one woman, who had been in an abusive relationship for many years and had divorced her husband, was forced to continue to live with her abusive ex-husband because she had literally nowhere else to go. This woman had been on the public housing waiting list since 1996. This situation, which is by no means isolated, violates not only the right to access to adequate housing but the human right to be free from violence which is protected in the South African Constitution.
Regarding inheritance issues, although there are provisions allowing women in South Africa to enjoy heritance and property rights, the Special Rapporteur received testimonies from rural area communities on how women, such as widows or single women, living in farms could not enjoy the secure tenure of their houses. The Special Rapporteur also notes the relevance of access to health, education, employment and other social services as critical elements of the right of women to adequate housing.

3.10 Special Needs
It is very apparent to the Special Rapporteur that there is a critical lack of housing and support for people with special needs including:
• People with disabilities
• People living with HIV/Aids
• Orphaned children and young people
• People with mental health issues
• Prisoners
• People with a terminal illness
• People experiencing homelessness

For instance, the Special Rapporteur was disturbed to hear that some people with disabilities had been on the public housing waiting list for over 20 years. The Special Rapporteur also heard that where there is provision for priority need allocations the process around the allocation is slow, confusing, varies from municipality to municipality and is extremely difficult for housing applicants to navigate.

The Special Rapporteur also observed that Special Need Housing Programme integrates the general National Housing Policy and the intentions is to allocate 5% of the total of the houses delivered to special need beneficiaries whose income level is between R1500-7500. This means that a great majority of people living under this threshold does not qualify for the subsidy.
3.11 Engagement with Civil Society

The Special Rapporteur met with many organizations advocating for the rights of the vulnerable and the poor and was impressed by their commitment and dedication. There is a disturbing trend toward what seem to be difficult relations between government and civil society.

However, it would appear that civil society organizations have been weakened by lack of funding options and few opportunities to properly engage with government.

The Special Rapporteur wishes to point out that a stronger and closer collaboration between government and civil society organizations, not only in terms of service delivery, but also in terms of having open avenues for advocacy and dialogue, is of prime importance in the elaboration of strategies and response to social problems.

4. Recommendations
• The Rapporteur recommends improved coordination amongst all government departments including housing, water, health, social services to ensure an approach to housing that recognises that housing will only be adequate where there is proper access to water, health services, employment and education opportunities and other civic and support services.
• Rehabilitation of urban areas must take place in a way that genuinely promotes a socially and economically inclusive society. The redevelopment of urban areas must not be left entirely to market forces which result in the exclusion of poor people from access to essential services and their livelihoods.
• The governments at different levels should considering intervening in the market to regulate the current high and unaffordable prices and land and property speculation.
• Provide adequate legal aid funding in civil and administrative law to ensure that people whose rights have been breached have proper access to affordable, quality legal representation to enforce their rights and seek redress, where appropriate, as provided for in the South African Constitution.
• It is suggested that a clear implementation strategy that is backed up by rigorous monitoring and evaluation requirements and involves affected communities, each level of government and support organizations, would greatly assist in translating good policy into positive practice.
• Given the widespread practice of evictions across the country, the Special Rapporteur calls for a moratorium on evictions until all national, provincial and local legislation, policies and administrative actions are brought into line with Constitutional provisions and relevant Constitutional Court judgements that protect the right to adequate housing and freedom from evictions.
• Monitor the implementation of court judgements that protect the right to housing at all levels of the South African judiciary system.
• There is a need for prosecutions of farmers who illegally evict farm workers. At the same time rigorous human rights education programmes is necessary to ensure that farm dwellers know their human right to housing and to be protected against evictions.
• There must be commitment across all levels of government to proper consultation and participation. This includes national and local funding and resourcing of civil society organizations.
• The Special Rapporteur calls for civil society actors and relevant academic institutions involved in work on the right to housing, land and protection against forced evictions, to consider establishing a national campaign on housing and land rights.
• Regarding the accountability and the accurate monitoring of the implementation of the policies, the Special Rapporteur recommends that the National Housing Building Register of Council needs to be more rigorous with the achievements of the standards set NHSS including the RDP Housing.
• The Special Rapporteur is of the view that the provision of water prepayment meters for water seriously compromises numerous human rights and may be contrary to the Constitution’s provision on the right to housing and the right to water. The Government should reconsider this policy.
• The provision of housing for people with special needs must be separated from the waiting list procedure for the general population. It is critical that a national policy for Special Needs housing is rapidly formulated.
• The Special Rapporteur urges the authorities to review the managing plans of the Anglo Platinum’s PPL mine at the earliest according to national regulations, and to assess the impact of the activity in the area and to review the lease agreement with the company.
• The International Covenant of Economic Social and Cultural Rights should be ratified and a more diligent follow up made to the concluding observations by the Treaty Bodies.