Monthly Archives: October 2009

Celebrating Our Victory Against the Slums Act

Abahlali baseMjondolo Press Statement
29 October 2009

Invitation to the Celebration of the Abahlali baseMjondolo Victory Against the Notorious and Now Buried Slums Act

On 14 October 2009 the Constitutional Court ruled against the KwaZulu-Natal provincial government and in favour of Abahlali baseMjondolo. The court found that Section 16 of the Slums Act was unconstitutional and invalid. The Slums Act now has been struck down.

Abahlali baseMjondolo will be holding a celebration of our victory against the Slums Act this Sunday, 1 November, at 9am. The celebration will take place the Richmond Farm Transit Camp. All progressive communities, journalists and members of the public are welcome.

Reasons for Choosing Richmond Farm Transit Camp as the Celebration Venue

The Richmond Farm Transit Camp has been chosen as the venue for the celebration because we are determined to ensure that this victory in the Constitutional Court against the Slums Act also marks an end to such transit camps (also knowns as amatins, TRAs and decant camps) which undermine our human dignity.

We have said, since the very first introduction of the Slums Act as a provincial bill, that transit camps are not temporary. Transit camps are being introduced to people as ‘temporary accommodation’, but on the ground people are staying in transit camps for much, much longer. People moved to transit camps are staying there for two years, ten years, or even longer. That shows the government does not know the meaning of temporary and that that the government cannot recognise our humanity. Transit camps are not a way to house the poor. They are a way for the government to expel the poor from the cities.

The people of Siyanda were forced to accept a legal eviction from their shacks to the Richmond Farm Transit Camp. They were not supposed to stay at the Richmond Farm Transit Camp for more than a year. This one year time limit is a negotiated, legally binding agreement made in court. In spite of this legally binding agreement, it is already the tenth month since the people of Siyanda have been living in the Richmond Farm Transit Camp. And, in spite of this court agreement, there is still no progress on when, where or how the people of Siyanda will be moved into houses. This is in spite of the fact that the eThekwini Municipality and the Department agreed, in court, to a one-year time limit. And yet the government has done nothing about their houses, and has said nothing about where their houses will be.

For all these ten months, the people at the Richmond Farm Transit Camp still do not have working toilets. They still do not have working taps for water. They still do not have security. In fact, people are being attacked everyday by criminals, especially when they are coming from work.

The eThekwini Municipality and the Department of Transport swore by an oath of the court that there would be adequate services and a time limit in the transit camp. But we can see that even when the government swears to a binding order of the court, and by the law of the land, they do not comply. And again it should be remembered that before the people of Siyanda were forced from their self-built homes, they had electricity, they had water, and there was no fear of being victims of crime as compared to the transit camp. Their shacks were also much bigger than the tiny accommodation in the transit camp. They had more privacy and they had space for small businessness, gardens and chickens.

It is for all these reasons that we are holding our celebration of the Slums Act victory at the Richmond Farm Transit Camp. We wish to bury the transit camps with the Slums Act and holding our celebration at at transit camp will remind us and show others what we are against and why. It will also show the people in this transit camp that although the government has forgotten them Abahlali baseMjondolo has not forgotten them.

Background of the Journey from the Shacks to Constitutional Court

1. Community Analysis

It has to be remembered that in 2007 Abahlali created a reading group and democratically elected a task team to analyse and discuss the content of the Slums Bill before it was passed as provincial legislation. Abahlali not only had a series of meetings at Kennedy Road to analyse the Act, but also held community meetings in each and every area to discuss it. This was so it could be further analysed and understood by each and every member who is living in a shack settlement. To see what the aim of the Bill was, and the feelings and analysis by the people, please see our first, original press statement.

During these discussions in all Abahlali areas, we felt that the aim of the Bill and the feelings of the people were in contradiction. This is because the feelings of the people were for their communities, the places where they stay, to be developed. The aim of the Bill, however, was to “eradicate” or “eliminate” their communities. People want development, not “eradication” or “elimination.” They do not want transit camps in faraway places. They do not want to be moved at the whim of the MEC, or municipality. The people who founded our settlements occupied land in the cities for good reasons. We are urbanites. We do not want to be ruralised in the name of ‘development’. We are resolved to defend our right to the cities.

2. The So-Called Public Participation Process

In 2007, soon after we held our own community discussions about the Bill, the KwaZulu-Natal legislature came to the shack settlements.

It was interesting to see the KwaZulu-Natal legislature coming to the shack settlements to hold public participation hearings about the Bill. A public hearing was held in Kennedy Road. When the legislature came to Kennedy Road, it was the first time we had seen them in the shacks. They came with heavily armed and intimidating police, even a police helicopter, and bussed in ANC members from other areas. It was like they were going to a war when in fact the were supposed to be coming for a discussion.

We mobilised at the Hall. We mobilised against the Slums Bill. But this mobilisation was used to justify that we had agreed on the content of the Bill! People were not allowed to raise their own feelings about the Bill, they were not allowed to use the microphone in the Hall, unless they could quote from the text of the Bill.

This was the so-called public participation process of the Slums Bill. But this was not a public participation process, with meaningful engagement. This was another lie of our democracy. The legislature that came to Kennedy Road were doing this just because the law requires them to vet the Bill in the communities, but the concerns and analysis of communities were not taken into consideration. Once again it was made clear that our role is to listen and not to think.

Abahlali made it clear that we were opposed to the Bill at the so-called public participation process. A week later, we were invited to Parliament, where the Bill was passed without the will of the people. The Bill was passed, in front of us, without us even having a chance to speak. So our invite was meant to justify the passing of the Bill. Our invite and so-called participation was meant to justify the passing of the Bill against the will of the people.

3. From Shack to The Durban High Court

It also has to be remembered that Abahlali opposed the Slums Act in the Durban High Court in 2008. When we went to the Durban High Court, ‘comrade’ Judge President Tshabalala found that the Act was consistent with the PIE Act and that, in fact, the province had taken a positive initiative in the making of this kind of law. He said the province should be applauded for the work it had done. The ‘comrade ‘Judge said that the province, through the Act, was dealing with the land and housing issues, and that the province had the power to pass such legislation. This is how the comradism of party politics works.

When Judge Tshabalala found in favour of the government, a decision which has since been overturned in its entirety, we had a number of debates on the radio and in the press. One of our young members were threatened by government officials after speaking on the TV news. They arrived in their 4X4s and promised to make sure that she lost her job.

Now that the High Court decision has been overturned, and Abahlali has won in the Constitutional Court, and Section 16 has been declared unconstitutional, and the Act has been scrapped, nothing is happening on the radio or in the press. So we call upon the very same radio stations and press who rushed to give the government space to discuss their victory to also provide us a space for public debate about the case.

After the Slums Bill was passed officially into legislation as the Slums Act, the municipality used the Act to justify evictions across the province. Evictions of communities such as KwaManciza (Ntuzuma), and other areas, were justified under the Slums Act.

And we believe that the municipality may still use it to justify evictions in areas that do not know about our victory over the Act. The municipality has always broken the law with regard to evictions, and we fear that they will continue despite the court ruling. Obviously our task as a movement is to inform communities about the outcome at the court and the meaning of this historic court ruling.

4. From the Shacks to the Constitutional Court

Abahlali were confident that this Act was unconstitutional, and so our appeal against the finding of the ‘comrade’ judge was taken straight to the Constitutional Court. The case was held before a full bench of Constitutional Court Judges. And they were able to find Section 16 unconstitutional. We were vindicated.

On the 14 of May 2009, Abahlali and our partners in the Poor People’s Alliance from across South Africa – the Western Cape Abahlali baseMjondolo, the Anti-Eviction Campaign, the Rural Network and the Landless People’s Movement – mobilised to go to the Constitutional Court to see and to witness the will of the people being brought forward in front of the highest Court in the land. Our partners in the Poor People’s Alliance mobilised not only in solidarity with comrades in KwaZulu-Natal, but also across the country, because the legislation was to be passed in every province in South Africa.

And on the 14 of October 2009, the cries and worries of poor communities across the country were considered. It was the first case of its kind where poor people at a grass-roots level were able to take the government to the highest court against legislation, and able to win the case.

Despite the fact that were told at the last hour on the previous day before the judgment was handed down, we as movement managed to mobilise to go to the Constitutional Court to listen and to witness the reading of the judgment.

Abahlali is facing violent attacks from the ANC. We know that the attacks on our movement were timed to coincide with our victory in the constitutional court. We know that the attackers want us to focus on the violence instead of focusing on celebrating the victory. We know that the attacks were planned to discredit the movement in the eyes of the media at the time of our victory. We know that this was done deliberately so that we would not be able to celebrate our victory at the Constitutional Court. We will claim our victory and we will ensure that there is wide discussion about its meaning and the way forward within our movement and within all the movements in the Poor People’s Alliance

5. The Constitutional Court Judgment

The reason we are having this celebration is that we should avoid misunderstandings of the judgment. The reason we are having this rally of celebration is so that the judgment can be read, discussed and analysed, and a way forward can be given as to the meaning and effect of it. We, there at the celebration, can collectively put together the thoughts and ideas of the people about the judgment and its meaning directly from people who are living in the shack settlements, as well as the rural areas, and provide a way forward, especially because we know that municipalities and private landowners will continue to break the law, or use the buried Slums Act. We will caution communities and think through a way forward.

We need to think and discuss what will happen to the transit camps or amatins because the amatin were a provision of the Slums Act. Now, after the judgment, the future of the amatins, the transit camps, the TRAs, the decant camps are in question.

And yet as we speak, after the attacks at Kennedy Road, the community at Kennedy Road has been threatened that they will now be moved to the notorious transit camps in Chatsworth.

Thanks and Further Invitation

We want to thank all the organisations and academics who made submissions on the Slums Bill, as well as CALS (The Centre for Applied Legal Studies) who represented Abahlali from the Durban High Court up until the Constitutional Court. We most especially want to acknowledge the shack intellectuals who analysed the Act, who compared it with their own living politics, and developed criticisms of the Act, which not only contributed to the case, but formed the whole basis of the case. The analysis and criticism from the High Court to the Constitutional Court is owning to them.

Abahlali will be slaughtering a cow as part of the victory celebration.

Again, progressive communities, journalists, and members of the public, please be invited.

Further Information and Comment

Please contact:

Mnikelo Ndabankulu: 079 745 0653
Zodwa Nsibande: 082 830 2707
Mazwi Nzimande: 074 222 8601

Police shoot residents in peaceful AEC protest against Gugs Mall

Gugulethu AEC Press Alert
29 October 2009 at 15h30

Police shoot residents in peaceful AEC protest against Gugs Mall

The Gugulethu police interrupted a peaceful protest by the Gugulethu Anti-Eviction Campaign this afternoon. Without warning residents at all, they shot at us with rubber bullets injuring dozens and arresting many others.

The much of the crowd was made up of old women and there were a lot of children also present. A 17 year old lady was shot in the face by the police and is now seriously injured and at the hospital.

At the moment we are not sure how many people have been shot and arrested. We do know, however, that today the police attempted to illegally ban the public protest which has been going on since Monday. From Monday through Wednesday, the police behaved respectuflly and helped escort us when we marched towards the mall. Today, they would not let us march. So a delegation of AEC activists went today to the Civic Centre in Cape Town to get a permit but we were prevented by police from entering the Civic Centre.

Why this sudden shift today in the way the police are treating us?

What we do know is that business tycoon Mzoli Ngcawuzele and councillor Belinda Landingwe have deep political connections and close friends within the Gugulethu Police. They have oppressed our movement in the past and shot at us before. They have arrested members of our movement and even physically threatened them through the use of local ANC thugs.

We believe that the police banned our march and then attacked us because we to big of a thorn in Mzoli’s side. We believe that the police attack was orchestrated by Mzoli and Belinda to prevent us from exposing the truth about the corruption and nepotism at the Gugulethu Square Mall. We believe that the police were ordered to attack us because we refused to work with the ANC’s Gugulethu Development Forum which plays party politics with our lives.

We believe that the attack on our movement corresponds with a dangerous trend in South Africa where the police are being militarised and being given political sanction to attack outspoken critics of the goverment such as the Anti-Eviction Campaign and Abahlali baseMjondolo (see Kennedy Road attacks).

Contacts: Malibongwe at 074 639 9551 and Mncedisi at 078 580 8646

Witness: Kennedy Road – The Facts

Witness: The age of innocence has died

Leave a reply

Click here to read the full version of this article at the South African Civil Society Information Service and here to read the version published in the Cape Times.

http://www.witness.co.za/index.php?showcontent&global[_id]=30103

The age of innocence has died
29 Oct 2009

KADER Asmal was quite right to warn that powerful people in the African National Congress (ANC) are actively working to build an anti- democratic constituency. Fikile Mbalula’s response, crafted with all the delicate subtlety of a blue-light cavalcade shooting motorists out of its path, offered quick confirmation of the patently antidemocratic depths to which political discourse has sunk in the ANC.

The people in the ANC who are pushing for a more authoritarian society in which an increasingly predatory elite shelters behind a militarised police force, a more socially conservative culture and escalating political intolerance, are full of passionate intensity because they have a clear vision of what they can gain. And what they can gain is social sanction for a form of authoritarian nationalism in which the dignity of the nation is reduced to the spectacle of the grand excesses on the part of its elites. We’ve always had a form of dual political citizenship in which the poor are excluded from meaningful access to our liberal democracy, but in recent years, elites have been lifted above its rules and norms.

We are not alone in this. At the end of the Cold War there was a powerful consensus that liberal democracy and free markets were the universal bedrock of social progress. Here in South Africa, we obediently put aside the popular democratic experiments of the eighties and founded the post- apartheid order on this consensus. In the wake of the financial crisis much has been made of the antisocial nature of an unregulated market, but a lot less has been said about the limits of liberal democracy.

Around the world, the failure of liberal democracy and free markets to develop inclusive societies has led to a deep popular scepticism about the value of liberal democracy, to the point where in many countries, such as Russia and India, there has been considerable popular support for an increasingly authoritarian elite nationalism. This elite nationalism often seeks to win popular consent with rising prosperity for the middle classes, authoritarian modes of securing personal safety, grand but empty spectacles of national progress and the management of the poor via the exploitation of ethnic sentiment and local-level patronage.

Many of the people who are horrified by the ANC’s drift towards an authoritarian nationalism organised around elite interests, lack all conviction in an alternative. Although some persevere, it’s simply not credible to argue that the solution to our social crisis is to continue with free markets and liberal democracy when this arrangement has so clearly failed the majority. Something has to change.

There is a serious debate about economics within the ANC, but it has often been reduced to a simple opposition between the state and the market. There has not been serious engagement with the fact that predatory elites can capture the state and profit from it at the expense of the majority with as much ruthlessness as any corporation. A comrade in a BMW is not necessarily any better than a boss in a BMW.

Serious economic change is essential if we are to build an inclusive society, but there can be no purely economic resolution of the crisis that we are in.

The current strategies by elites to manage the poor with grants, service delivery and forced removal to transit camps are very modest — in fact they amount to a strategy for short-term containment at the level of basic survival rather than a strategy for a viable society, let alone for justice.

But although this strategy is so modest, it is failing because the ANC no longer secures the loyalty of its cadres on the basis of a shared vision. It secures its political support on the basis of a share in the plunder from the state and so its high-level leaders are simply not in a position to deal with the systemic capture and distortion of development by local party elites.

This is a political problem that will continue irrespective of whether or not development is driven by the market or the state. But there is no serious discussion about progressive political innovation within the ANC. There is equally little discussion about this in wider society.

The problem that is not being faced up to is that while liberal democracy offers everyone the same rights to engage and shape the future in principle, in practice, access to the media, the courts and electoral politics are all commodified to the point where there is systemic exclusion of the poor.

If we could draw on the popular democratic experiments developed during the struggles against apartheid in the eighties, and similar experiments in recent times in countries like Haiti and Bolivia, we may be able to propose a deepening of democracy in opposition to the current impasse. If we don’t generate a more democratic alternative to liberal democracy, authoritarian alternatives will triumph. But the pervasive antidemocratic sentiments in our society are not limited to the ANC. There is a general assumption that the poor are beneath the law. The DA in Cape Town is as willing to engage in criminal behaviour towards poor people, such as unlawful evictions, as is the ANC; while in civil society, there is a general assumption that the realisation of human rights should occur through a professionalised NGO politics that is profoundly disconnected from the reach of ordinary people.

Development is generally conceived in technocratic terms that leave no room for meaningful popular participation. There is a widespread tolerance across society for authoritarian solutions to social problems. Ethnic and national sentiment is on the rise.

The most important experiments in deepening our democracy and placing it firmly in the hands of ordinary people, take place not in universities, think-tanks or NGOs but within the struggles of poor people’s movements for meaningful social inclusion. These struggles are the canary in the deepest shafts of the struggle to mine a fuller mode of popular engagement from our democracy.

The ongoing attack on Abahlali baseMjondolo (AbM), the largest poor people’s movement in South Africa, has been entirely unlawful and framed in terms of the most base ethnic chauvinism and sexism. A month after the first attack on the movement, its leaders remain homeless and continue to live in hiding and under public threats of death.

AbM leader S’bu Zikode could go to the Constitutional Court to hear the judges rule in his favour on the Slums Act but he cannot go home. His house has been destroyed and he lives under threat of death.

Some ANC leaders in the eThekwini Municipality and the KwaZulu-Natal Provincial Government have, in word and deed and without consequence, given clear sanction to the most serious attack on democracy since the end of apartheid.

The canary in the coalmine of our democracy has been enthusiastically clubbed into a state close to death. Church leaders have spoken out with great courage and a few academics and students have taken action. But on the whole this terrible and ominous event has passed without much public discussion.

Liberal democracy has no long- term future in South Africa. But for as long as alternatives on the left are repressed and those on the right are backed by the power of the state, democracy as a whole will have no long-term future. — The South African Civil Society Information Service (www.sacsis.org.za)

•Richard Pithouse teaches politics at Rhodes University.

Mercury: Shack settlements still serve the poor