OPINION - At the risk of being accused of attempting to buck the system, it is necessary to question those who formulated the rules governing the 21-day Covid-19 lockdown .
Putting in place a one-rule policy for all was disingenuous and unworkable. With our unique situation in the townships, informal settlements and squatter camps with millions of people living on top on each other, using communal toilets, sharing water points etc, it was never feasible to expect up to 14 people comprising parents, children, grandparents etc who occupy a single dwelling the size of my sitting room to stay indoors in 40ºC weather for three weeks.
Not only is it impossible to implement, it is also inhumane. Perhaps the answer is to lock down individual areas with different rules for each area depending on their circumstances .
People in high-density areas, for example, cannot be expected to stay indoors but should practise social distancing, wear masks and gloves supplied by the state.
Spaza shops are there to take care of their needs and the state should ensure supply chains are active.
Then there’s the question of dogs being walked. What on Earth is the point of this rule? A person can walk to the shop but can’t walk their dog? Duh! How is a woman of 75 walking her dog around the block once a day endangering others?
Suggestions by the man in the hat with the John Wayne swagger that there’s a danger that people will stop to chat while walking their dogs and spread the virus are absurd.
The ban on cigarette sales rule is another head-scratcher. Smokers being deprived of their habit, albeit a noxious one, will become unstable, which could lead to violence.
A one-size-fits-all attitude by the authorities isn’t feasible. There’s still time to go back to the drawing board and reboot the rules. More thought is required.