Monthly Archives: October 2009

Daily News: Attempt to remove informal settlers in conflict with Constitution

Leave a reply

http://www.dailynews.co.za/index.php?fArticleId=5209954

Protecting the vulnerable
Attempt to remove informal settlers in conflict with Constitution

October 20, 2009 Edition 1

Sayed Iqbal Mohammed

The poor and the government, as interested parties, eagerly awaited the Constitutional Court’s judgment on the KwaZulu-Natal Elimination and Prevention of Re-Emergence of Slums Act 6 of 2007 (the Slums Act).

Security of tenure and the prevention of concentrated power in the hands of government were of great concern to the first two applicants, Abahlali Basejondolo Movement of SA, and Sibusiso Zikode.

The applicants represent the hopes of the thousands of poor, informal occupiers.

In contrast, the then MEC of Local Government, Housing and Traditional Affairs Mike Mabuyakhulu’s Slums Act was seized with great enthusiasm by the then Minister of Housing, Lindiwe Sisulu, and other provincial housing MECs.

They represented, as it were, a different vision, hoping for a favourable judgment that would enable the replication of the Slums Act in all provinces.

Through this column on February 3, 2009, the judgment of Judge President Mr Justice Vuka Tshabalala in favour of the government was criticised.

In summary, it was argued that the Slums Act :

1. Secured the perimeters around any hope for a list of the objectives of engagement for the poor. There was no reference to co-operation or consultation between the government and the poor.

2. Will not benefit the many thousands who live in squalid conditions in the inner cities and suburbs, paying exorbitant rentals; families who lost their beloved ones, some decapitated by dysfunctional lifts.

3. Made no sense to promulgate the Slums Act when other legislation existed, like the Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act 19 of 1998 (PIE).

Mabuyakhulu subsequently responded, belligerently arguing, among other things, that the rule of law was disrespected in criticising the honourable Judge President Tshabalala’s judgment.

In a sense, what was advocated was that judges do not err and that once pronounced, a judgment cannot be interrogated meaningfully. In fact, it was the construction of section 16 of the Slums Act that offended the rule of law.

Mabuyakhulu defended the Slums Act and believed “that when judges rule, they make their ruling on the basis of law and not on the basis of opinion or feelings”.

The majority judgment of ten Constitutional Court judges on October 14 most certainly did not agree with such obtuse views.

The applicants were granted leave to appeal the High Court judgment before the Constitutional Court, which delivered its judgment last week.

Yacoob J gave a dissenting judgment, considered to be a “well-worked and comprehensive judgment” wherein section 16 of the Slums Act was not held to be inconsistent with section 26(2) of the Constitution.

He argued that there were existing legislative measures and, together with the interpretation of the Slums Act, the poor and vulnerable would be protected.

The majority judgment found section 16 of the Slums Act to be in conflict with the National Housing Act and the National Housing Code, and this section failed in providing an interpretation to promote its salutary objectives.

In essence, the majority judgment protects the rights of the poor, upholds the Constitutional provisions, guarantees the right to housing, strikes down the intended coercive power to local government and prevents the Slums Act from being replicated in other provinces.

In paragraph 122 of the judgment, Moseneke DCJ states: “There is indeed a dignified framework that has been developed for the eviction of unlawful occupiers and I cannot find that section 16 is capable of an interpretation that does not violate this framework.

“Section 26(2) of the Constitution, the national Housing Act and the PIE Act all contain protections for unlawful occupiers. They ensure that their housing rights are not violated without proper notice and consideration of other alterna- tives.

“The compulsory nature of section 16 disturbs this carefully established legal framework by introducing the coercive institution of eviction proceedings in disregard of these protections.”

In paragraph (127): “We find section 16 to be unconstitutional in offending against section 26(2) of the Constitution and the rule of law.

“To the extent that justification is in issue at all, the province sought to tender none, relying solely on interpret-ation. We can find none.”

The respondents were ordered to pay costs, which will be paid for by taxpayers.

Perhaps provinces may realise the need for reasonable and meaningful engagement with the poor and vulnerable at the outset that would inform any legislative framework intended to improve the lives of the poor.

Wasted legal costs could be spent in promoting a genuine partnership and towards protecting the vulnerable poor from criminal elements.

Dr Sayed Iqbal Mohamed, is the chairman of the Organisation of Civic Rights.

Website: www.ocr.org.za

For tenant’s rights advice, contact Pretty Gumede or Loshni Naidoo at 031 304 6451.

Interview with Zodwa Nsibande on Workers’ World Radio

Leave a reply

In this week’s labour news from the African continent and beyond (http://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/454/WK%2031%20ALRN.mp3 ) [mp3] The Kennedy Thirteen, members of the embattled shackdwellers’ movememt Abahlali baseMjondolo are arraigned in court, miners stage a sit-in at a Mpumalanga mine, and Tanzanian workers push for salary review implementation. This bulletin is part of a partnership between Worker’s World Media Productions and Pambazuka News that seeks to highlight labour issues affecting Africa’s workers.

In solidarity with Abahlalibase Mjondolo (AbM) 4

Click here to read Jacques Depelchin’s first three letters on the attack on Abahlali baseMjondolo.

Dearest Friends,

Like many people in South Africa and around the world, I am still stunned by what has been done to the people living at the Kennedy Road Settlement in Durban.

From 2005, AbM seems to have managed to overcome many obstacles, but, or so it seems, it has not been able (yet) to overcome the biggest one, namely appearing to be giving a lesson in emancipatory politics to the ANC.

Since assuming power, it seems that there are members of the ANC who seem to have forgotten the role played by ALL the people, but especially, the poorest of the poorest, in propelling the ANC to power. This forgetting could have lethal consequences, not just for the PoPs, but also for every citizen in South Africa and beyond. In the history of emancipatory politics, from slavery to today, the enslaved, the colonized, by definition, must never ever free themselves. Should they try and, worst of all, succeed, those in power shall quickly “put them back into their place”. In retribution, more often than not, this trespassing act, or so considered by those in power was followed by the most severe of punishments, preceded, if necessary, by torture. Since 2005, AbM has been giving lessons on emancipatory politics to a party in power which, directly or indirectly, claims to be the only one to know how to bring about emancipatory politics. Other historical examples are too numerous to list, but let us start with one of the most notorious:

Toussaint-L’Ouverture and the Africans of Santo Domingo of which AbM could claim to be a descendant since the poor of today are being treated like the slaves of the past. The sin of Toussaint and his comrade in arms was to succeed where the slave masters insisted they could not possibly do. For the slave masters, by definition, enslaved Africans could not possibly organize their own emancipation. For them, such a feat required the kind of intellect and organizational skills which the enslaved could simply not have, by virtue of being Africans and enslaved.

From the available information, it seems that the greatest sin of AbM has been to outsmart the ruling party in an area (politics) in which it considered itself unbeatable, unchallengeable. The behavior of the party clearly shows that some within the ANC felt that AbM had to be put back in its place. Ever since 2005, various methods have been tried and they have all failed. AbM and its leadership became more popular as some within the ANC became more agitated at not being able to outperform AbM in an arena the ANC considered to be its own turf. And to make matters worse, the AbM outdid the ANC using politics in a way the ANC has systematic failed to do, i.e. consult with the people all the time, not just at election time, and, all the time respond to the needs of the people, while treating them with the respect due to equals.

In Haiti, the success of the Africans was followed by withering punishment, individual and collective, and still unfolding to this day. It was crucial for the French state (and its allies) to do everything for Haiti never to be a functional state. As Peter Hallward showed in his book, the Africans were forced to pay compensation to those who lost their property (slaves and plantations). The payment took place from 1825 through 1946. When President Jean-Bertrand Aristide pointed out that that compensation money had to be restituted, France balked at paying back what had been calculated to amount to 20 billion Euros. Meanwhile, France had passed the Law Taubira, making slavery a Crime Against Humanity, but stipulating, at the same time, that such a recognition did not imply reparations. President Jean-Bertrand Aristide insisted that restitution was not reparation.

Those who have vowed to continue the fight started by the Africans more than 200 years ago are still being harassed and tortured as demonstrated by the current military occupation of Haiti by the UN, and the kidnapping of people like Lovinsky Pierre-Antoine simply because they keep calling for the return of President Jean-Bertrand Aristide. (Pierre-Antoine was “disappeared” in Port-Au-Prince in August 2007).

Other examples are the Native Americans in all of the Americas, but, in particular, in the US. For having resisted the occupation and then the stealing of their land, the Native Americans have paid, and continue to pay a price difficult to imagine for anyone who has not visited any of the Reservations to which they have been restricted.

For now, let me stop here and bring out more examples later on.

Again dear members of AbahlalibaseMjondolo we shall never thank you enough for standing up for those of us who do not have your courage. Thank you for spelling out patiently, non violently, persistently the principles of emancipatory politics. Thank you for your prescriptions on the South African State. Thank you for your fidelity to humanity.

In solidarity,

Jacques Depelchin
13-Oct-2009

Statement in Support of The “Shack Dwellers” of Kennedy Road Settlement from Picture the Homeless, New York

Leave a reply

Statement in Support of The “Shack Dwellers” of Kennedy Road Settlement, Durban, South Africa from Picture the Homeless, New York City, USA

It is with great concern that I pen this statement of solidarity in support of the current struggles of the South African “Shack Dwellers” of the Kennedy Road Settlement of Durban South Africa.

The Abahlali baseMjondolo is part of an African Nationalist Poor People’s Alliance. This Alliance much like my beloved “Picture the Homeless,” is led and directed by those who are directly impacted, trapped in poverty and extreme poverty. The current global population of over six billion by 2025; Accordingly, the distribution of land and other natural resources is a burning issue that effects all the inhabitants of our globe.

This issue cannot be resolved in a just manner by resorting to neo-liberal, free market economic policy such as the invisible hand i.e. the so called “Washington Consensus.” Pursuant to this outmoded capitalistic model, far too many sister and brothers would be priced out of current markets left without the means to access vital commodities that are essential to sustaining life. It is no exaggeration to state that disproportionately the global populations in peril are persons of color. As Jeffery Sachs points out by the sheer number of preventable deaths that occur in Africa alone on a daily basis, we are witnessing a form of global population control that manifests itself in the form of subtle genocide!
From Brooklyn to Brazil, from the Gulf Coast in America to the Gold Coast of Africa, this inhumane process continues to take its toll. The socio-economic data coming forth from South and Central America from 1980 to date provide proof that neo-liberal economic policy in the hands of multinational corporations who have more rights than the worlds citizens and far less responsibility cannot continue to be left unregulated, and unaccountable.

–Jean Rice, Picture the Homeless

We in New York understand all too well what Rev. Mavuso, the abahlali basemjondolo and the Shack dwellers are going through.

Just yesterday Picture the Homeless was in court to fight for the right of poor people to occupy the vacant land in Harlem that has been warehoused for decades. Interestingly enough, the attorneys for Chase Manhattan Bank, the worldwide financial conglomerate, refused to present any evidence documenting their ownership and title for the vacant property where our Tent City Ten were arrested.
You see, homeless landless poor people in New York know what it’s like to be pushed aside so that upper-class friends of the government officials can take possession of our community. Bankers and billionaires pull the (campaign) strings and elected officials respond. One example is the Old Broadway Hotel which was cited in the newspapers a while ago when it turned out the DHS was paying thousands of dollars person per month to be warehoused in this shelter that was owned by friends of the mayor.

We also see homeless people pushed aside for the construction of the New YANKEE STADIUM THE Upcoming Ratner Arena in Brooklyn. Sound like the abahlali are in the way of the 2010 World Cup soccer.
Our struggle is one. Poor people need housing. Housing is human right. The capitalists who seem to think that they alone are entitled to live on land created by God are our foes. We stand with the poor, the landless, the homeless in the fight for justice and equity
–Rogers

Owen Rogers (orogers@hotmail.com)

********* A LUTTA CONTINUA************

A Progressive Policy Without Progressive Politics: Lessons from the failure to implement ‘Breaking New Ground’

1 Reply

The full article is attached, below, in pdf.

A Progressive Policy Without Progressive Politics: Lessons from the failure to implement ‘Breaking New Ground’

by Richard Pithouse

“Depoliticization is the oldest task of politics.”
– Jacques Rancière (2007: 19)

This article provides a brief overview of post-apartheid housing policy. It argues that, in principle, ‘Breaking New Ground’ (BNG) was a major advance over the subsidy system but that the failure to implement BNG, which has now been followed by more formal moves away from a rights based and towards a security based approach, lie in the failure to take a properly political approach to the urban crisis. It is suggested that a technocratic approach privileges elite interests and that there could be better results from an explicitly pro-poor political approach – which would include direct support for poor people’s organisations to challenge elite interests, including those in the state, and to undertake independent innovation on their own.