Judge hears arguments on the eviction of the homeless in Green Point

Homeless people from a settlement next to the Green Point tennis courts, also referred to as “Tent City”, were evicted by law enforcement officers on August 23. ARMAND HOUGH African News Agency (ANA)

Homeless people from a settlement next to the Green Point tennis courts, also referred to as “Tent City”, were evicted by law enforcement officers on August 23. ARMAND HOUGH African News Agency (ANA)

Published Sep 5, 2021

Share

The Western Cape High Court has heard that the City of Cape Town’s eviction of a group of homeless people next to the Green Point Tennis club did not follow due process and only relied on obscure provisions of its by-laws.

Legal counsel of the homeless argued that the eviction and the demolition of their tents and the confiscation of their medication, clinic cards, identity documents and other personal belongings violated their constitutional rights.

In addition, the action by the City’s law enforcement officers when they evicted the homeless on August 23 did not comply with the Prevention of Illegal Eviction From and Unlawful Occupation of Land (PIE) and the Disaster Management Act, the legal counsel argued.

Senior counsel Ranjan Jaga said that no court order was obtained by the City to carry out the eviction, but instead relied on the by-law relating to Streets, Public Places and the Prevention of Noise Nuisances, which in turn did not empower the officials to dismantle the tents.

Homeless people from a settlement next to the Green Point tennis courts, also referred to as “Tent City”, were evicted by law enforcement officers on August 23. ARMAND HOUGH African News Agency (ANA)

“The rule of law has been violated here. Where is the evidence that any by-law was violated on August 23?

“The City has not provided a shred of evidence to that effect. Even the City’s own video footage does not indicate any violation,” Jaga told the court.

The homeless were charged with intentionally obstructing or interfering with free passage of pedestrians and vehicles.

But legal representatives Jaga and Alton Samuels argued that the alleged contravention would have been reflected in the notices issued to the homeless.

Jaga further argued that the Principal Inspector of Law Enforcement had set out in an internal memo a three phase process that needed to be followed in dealing with occupation of land and one of these was advising officers not to demolish structures.

He also argued that the tents were homes to the homeless as they conducted their business in those structures.

“If you want to evict, go to court and obtain an order.

“You can’t take the law into your own hands using a by-law that does not trump the provisions in the constitution and other pieces of legislation,” said Jaga.

He also told the court that the mayor’s visit to the homeless prior to the demolitions had left an impression that they could carry on with their lives there until after the lockdown.

An affidavit filed by the main applicant in the case told the court that she had been sexually violated at one of The Haven Night Shelters by an official and this was not a viable alternative accommodation.

Tents at the Green Point tennis courts. LEON LESTRADE African News Agency (ANA)

Jaga argued that the alternative accommodation should be on a voluntary basis.

Legal counsel for the City dismissed the allegation and said it was “unsubstantiated” as it did not have further details on when the attack occurred.

Advocate Roseline Nyman asked the court to consider the contents of an affidavit by the chief executive of The Haven Night Shelter, Hassan Khan, who said the night shelters provided safety, security, meals, counselling and drug rehabilitation services to the homeless.

Khan recently opened a shelter in Strandfontein and said would take in homeless people from across the city.

Nyman further argued that the City had received numerous complaints from property owners and residents in Green Point, Sea Point and Camps Bay regarding the homeless.

“We have street people living in public spaces on one hand and those living in houses on the other, plus those visiting the Sea Point promenade and the question is should the City permit a prime space like the promenade to be overcome with homeless people?” argued Nyman.

She also told the court that living conditions in the area had deteriorated and those wanting to use the tennis courts were concerned about their safety.

Nyman refuted argument that tents constituted an informal settlement and said the PIE Act did not apply.

Judgment was reserved.

Related Topics:

City of Cape Town