Abahlali shack dwellers fight to stay on prime land

Hundreds of people from the shack dwellers’ movement Abahlali baseMjondolo, Ubunye BamaHostela Movement, and Market Users Committee marched in Durban yesterday, demanding an end to corruption and for their rights to be recognised. Picture: Doctor Ngcobo / African News Agency / ANA

Hundreds of people from the shack dwellers’ movement Abahlali baseMjondolo, Ubunye BamaHostela Movement, and Market Users Committee marched in Durban yesterday, demanding an end to corruption and for their rights to be recognised. Picture: Doctor Ngcobo / African News Agency / ANA

Published Dec 2, 2020

Share

Durban - Abahlali base Mjondolo shack-dwellers movement is opposing KwaDukuza Municipality’s Durban High Court bid to evict scores of people who are living in an informal settlement next to luxurious golf estate developments in the Sheffield Beach and Salt Rock area.

KwaDukuza municipal manager Nhlanhla Mdakane said in court papers that properties adjacent to the land, which has been earmarked for RDP housing, had been acquired by “certain developers who embarked on an aggressive programme” to develop the area into upmarket sectional title estates.

The respondents in the matter are cited in court papers as “+-100 informal settlers at the Sheffield Beach and Salt Rock area”.

“These estates are virtually complete but not operational as yet. In developing the golf estate the developers spent several million rand. The developers are now in the process of selling off the various units on a sectional title basis,” Mdakane said.

“The units are being advertised as ‘luxurious apartments’ with certain facilities that would attract ardent golfers and persons fond of nature.”

Mdakane said the developers had employed local labour during construction.

“As time went by the workforce grew in numbers and gradually settled on the property upon which they erected their informal structures. The number of persons occupying the land is approximately 100. Of these, approximately 10 to 15 are children,” he said.

“The occupation of the land is rather unhygienic and conditions are squalid. There are no sanitary services and/or water supply. For these purposes the respondents endeavour to conceal themselves behind the nearby bush so as to relieve themselves,” he said.

Mdakane said the municipality held a meeting with the developers in which they had made it clear that they did not intend to proceed any further with the development unless the “squatters” were relocated because their presence was affecting unit sales and had devalued the properties.

Mdakane said the land in question was owned by the municipality which intended to erect approximately 800 “high rising units” of two to three floors at a cost of R200 million, funded by the Department of Human Settlements.

He said the municipality’s “main concern” was to ensure that the informal dwellers were not left homeless and that it could provide an “alternative arrangement” on land at Mgigimbe, 30km away.

Mkadane said the informal dwellers had advised the municipality that they had “a valid claim to the land and/or alternatively labour tenancy rights over the land”.

However, he said the Commission on Restitution of Land Rights had indicated that no land claim had been lodged and consequently they were “illegal occupiers” with “no bona fide defence to the eviction proceedings”.

Informal dweller Thulani Khanyile, speaking in court papers on behalf of the community, said most of the people living on the site had worked on the golf estate and other residential developments in the area, and others had arrived from the Eastern Cape seeking economic opportunities.

He said there were 117 households, which included more than 50 children. He said he was born in the Sheffield Beach and Salt Rock area, previously known as eThafeni.

“In 1987 my family and other black African settlers in the area were forcefully removed by white settlers … our homes were demolished. I then moved to the Groutville area where I rented a site for R100 a year,” he said.

Khanyile said residents had battled financially after the developments had been completed but remained “closely connected and dependent on a number of socio-economic amenities in this area, including work, schools, clinics, social services and a good transport network”.

He said the municipality had not meaningfully engaged with the community in terms of the Prevention of Illegal Eviction From and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act 19 of 1998 before instituting legal proceedings.

He further argued the residents had a right to adequate housing and the municipality was obliged to tell the court what relief it could provide for the occupiers.

The matter was postponed indefinitely.

Mercury

Related Topics: