Court slams City of Cape Town for barring access to Strandfontein homeless camp
Judge Desai found that South African Human Rights Commission monitors trying to enter the site were acting lawfully.
Author: James Stent
- The Western Cape High Court has criticised the City of Cape Town for its treatment of human rights monitors at its camp for homeless people in Strandfontein.
- The court also dismissed interdicts granted to the City last year which prevented the monitors and the South African Human Rights Commission from entering the site.
- In May 2020, the City announced the closure of the site just six weeks after it opened at a cost of R53 million.
- It is unclear if the City will appeal.
The Western Cape High Court has given the City of Cape Town a tongue-lashing for how it treated human rights monitors at its Strandfontein relocation site during the national lockdown.!
This comes nine months after judgment was reserved in the case between the City and the South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC). On Wednesday, the City was also ordered to pay costs for the hearing.
The judgment was handed down by Judge Siraj Desai on Wednesday morning. The judge delivered the judgment in court and it was streamed on the Internet.
Judge Desai said that the City had sought to muzzle freedom of expression.
- CoCT accused of dumping homeless people accommodated at Strandfontein facility
- MSF: Strandfontein homeless shelter could be a COVID-19, TB hotspot
- CoCT urged to take responsibility for homeless people removed from Strandfontein
Last year, the City was granted an interdict preventing the Commission and its appointed independent human rights observers from entering the Strandfontein relocation camp. The camp housed about 2,000 homeless people relocated from different parts of the city at the start of the national lockdown a year ago.
The interdict followed a report released by the SAHRC that brought to light disturbing conditions at the camp. In response the City went to court for an interdict, arguing that the Commission and its monitors had caused disruption at the camp, and were spreading “misinformation and lies.”
The City, at the time, also argued that the SAHRC did not have the power to appoint independent monitors to supplement their staff, and that the monitors were in breach of lockdown regulations.
When the case appeared before the High Court again in June 2020, the City withdrew its application.
On Wednesday, Judge Desai dismissed the interdicts granted to the City, finding that the SAHRC had acted lawfully. He said that the Commission was allowed to appoint independent human rights monitors, and that the City should show proper respect to Chapter Nine bodies like the SAHRC. In fact, the City has a duty to assist the Commission, he said.
Judge Desai’s written order was not available at time of publication.
UPDATE AT 16:15: In a statement, the City said that while it did not agree with Desai’s court ruling it will "consider our options once the written judgment is made available by the court".
The City criticised the SAHRC: "Unfortunately, known political opportunists were deployed by South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC) provincial Commissioner Chris Nissen to play politics and tell outright lies about South Africa’s biggest effort to help people living on the street."