|
Negotiations must be held before residents can be evicted from unsafe inner city buildings, the Constitutional Court has ruled.
The Constitutional Court has ruled that municipalities can evict people from unsafe buildings, but only after negotiating with them
JOHANNESBURG has welcomed the legal certainty surrounding unsafe buildings. In a statement responding to a Constitutional Court judgment, the City pointed out that it was already following an approach of meaningful engagement with residents.
"The Constitutional Court's judgment vindicates the City's position that it was within its administrative rights to eliminate unsafe and unhealthy buildings and to remove people from such structures for their own safety."
The Constitutional Court ruled that people living in unsafe buildings in the inner city may not be evicted by the City of Johannesburg, without the City first consulting the residents. This applies even if an eviction order was passed by a court of law.
The judgment was passed by the Constitutional Court on 19 February, in a case brought by the occupants of 51 Olivia Road, Berea and 197 Main Street. The buildings were deemed to be unsafe and hazardous by the City and an eviction order was obtained from the Supreme Court of Appeal in 2007.
Eviction order
The occupants of the buildings in question turned to the Constitutional Court to stop the eviction order.
After lengthy deliberation, the Constitutional Court upheld the original decision taken by the high court, which ordered the City to remedy its housing programme as it was found to be inadequate.
Judge Zak Yacoob said the eviction of the 400 occupants was judged to be unconstitutional based on the lack of meaningful engagement prior to the eviction.
"People must be treated as human beings," he said.
The court's decision was unanimous and held that it was "essential for a municipality to engage meaningfully before ejecting people from their homes if they would become homeless after the eviction".
In his judgment, Yacoob said a court must take into account whether meaningful engagement had taken place before granting an eviction order. He found this not to have been the case in this instance.
"The Supreme Court of Appeal should therefore not have granted the ejection order in the circumstances of this case where there had been no engagement."
Alternative accommodation
The original eviction order granted by the Supreme Court of Appeal was passed "on condition that the City would provide alternative accommodation to those who would be rendered homeless".
The case came before the Constitutional Court in August 2007, but judgment was reserved subject to further engagement between the two parties. The court ordered both parties to consult with each other and to come up with short-term solutions for improved living conditions and providing alternative accommodation.
Subsequently, an agreement was reached by the parties and made an order of court by the Constitutional Court. In it, the parties agree to the provision of temporary and permanent housing solutions by the City of Johannesburg; that occupants may not be ejected from buildings; and that the City will upgrade the buildings in question.
While Yacoob confirmed the City's obligation to eliminate unsafe and unhealthy buildings, "its constitutional duty to provide access to adequate housing means that potential homelessness must be considered by a city when it decides whether to evict people from buildings".
Johannesburg has confirmed with the Constitutional Court that it is undertaking extensive consultation and public participation processes. Residents and other stakeholders will be given the opportunity to question and comment on the City's housing plans.
Emergency shelter
At present, it is converting several inner city buildings into interim emergency shelters to accommodate people who have to be moved from unsafe buildings. These are the old Perm building in Hillbrow; the Chelsea building in Hillbrow; the MBV building in Hillbrow; the Hospital Hill building; Santa Monica Court and Noverna Court; Muti House; and the BG Alexander building.
Through the Inner City Regeneration Charter, a further 50 000 to 75 000 residential units will be built by 2015, of which at least 20 000 will be for households in the lower income groups.
The City was ordered to pay the costs of the applicants.
Related stories:
|
