CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
Nthabiseng Pheko and Others v Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality (Socio- Economic Rights Institute of South Africa as Amicus Curiae)
Case No.: CCT 19/11 Date of Hearing: 15 September 2011
MEDIA SUMMARY
The following explanatory note is provided to assist the media in reporting this case and is not binding on the Constitutional Court or any member of the Court.
On Thursday 15 September 2011 the Constitutional Court will hear an application for leave to appeal against the judgment of the North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria, which found the relocation of hundreds of families’ residing in the Bapsfontein Informal Settlement to be lawful.
The Bapsfontein Informal Settlement falls within the jurisdiction of the Ekurhuleni Municipality. Pursuant to complaints of the formation of sinkholes in the Infomal Settlement area, the Municipality authorised investigations. Reports concluded that the area was dolomitic and that the residents should be relocated to a safe area. In December 2010 the Municipality declared the area a “disaster” area in terms of the Disaster Management Act. Relocations took place from December 2010 until March 2011. When the residents refused to be relocated, they were forcibly removed from the area and their homes were demolished on instruction by the Municipality.
The residents unsuccessfully applied to the High Court on an urgent basis to stop their relocation and the demolition of their homes on the basis that the eviction was not authorised by a court order. The High Court held that the relocation was lawful because the Municipality could not allow them to remain in an unsafe place. It also held that the laws governing evictions were not applicable to the case.
In the Constitutional Court, the applicants challenge the lawfulness of the Municipality’s conduct. They submit that their relocation amounts to an eviction and was done in a manner which infringes their rights to dignity, property and to access to adequate housing as well as their right not be evicted or have their homes demolished without an order of court.
The Municipality contends that the evacuation does not amount to an eviction and thus a court order was not required.
The amicus curiae, the Socio-Economic Rights Institute of South Africa, submits that there was no reason in the circumstances to warrant the Municipality’s departure from the provisions of the Constitution and laws governing eviction and that the Municipality’s conduct was unlawful.
