• Tweet

UP IN ARMS: Police monitor toyi-toying residents of Marlboro near Alexandra, who barricaded the streets in protest against their eviction and the destruction of their shacks. Photo: Tsheko Kabasia

 Marlboro shack dwellers take the legal route 

RELATED ARTICLES

• Squatters rebuild shacks
• Squatters in stand-off

FAMILIES squatting on a piece of land in Marlboro, an industrial site near Alexandra in Johannesburg, are due to meet the City of Joburg in the Johannesburg High Court today over their eviction.

Lawyers for Human Rights (LHR), representing the squatters, confirmed they had filed for an urgent interdict following renewed clashes between their clients and the Johannesburg Metropolitan Police Department yesterday.

Metro police demolished squatters' structures in what residents say is an illegal eviction.

The two parties have for years been involved in long battles, with the Johannesburg Metro Council trying to evict them from its land.

LHR's Louise du Plessis said in the application they wanted the city to return the families to the land or provide them with alternative accommodation.

Du Plessis said the court ruled last Friday that the families could return to the land after they had been evicted a few weeks ago.

"On Friday we got an order that said people could go back to the land. They had been living in tents somewhere after they had been evicted. The City of Johannesburg says they can return to the land but not put up structures, even temporary structures. We want them to explain what that means," she said.

She said following Friday's temporary ruling the residents had started erecting shacks.

Du Plessis also said they were scheduled to return to court on Wednesday next week to hear the council's explanation and the court ruling thereof.

But the metro police pounced on the residents on Monday night, demolishing their structures again. The residents started a protest at 3am, barricading streets with burning tyres and rocks.

Gerald Mabogwane said he had lived in the area for 13 years and it was the council's responsibility to provide him and the rest of the group with alternative accommodation.

"I live with my wife and two children. We have been fighting with the metro police over this issues since 2005. We do not have a problem moving from here but, in accordance with the law, the council must provide us with alternative accommodation."

Community leader Charles Gininda said they viewed police action as harassment.

"We are fighting with the council but it is the police who come with rubber bullets and teargas. We no longer understand who we are dealing with here," he said.

Council spokesman Gabu Tugwana said he was not aware of today's court date. - xabav@sowetan.co.za

Comments

• Sign in or sign up to comment

Tue May 21 08:11:07 SAST 2013 ::

Aug 23, 2012

Sinudeity_

"Metro police demolished squatters' structures in what residents say is an illegal eviction."

But nothing about illegal occupation?
Report Abuse

Aug 23, 2012

Chichi7

I do not understand why residents are fighting for land that is not theirs and it is illegally occupied. According to the law, they must find alternative land? Really? I love the way people except everyone to give things on a silver platter.
Report Abuse

Aug 23, 2012

LBS

Another ill thought out law coming back to bite the ANC on their @rses?

Wasn't this law introduced to prevent farmers and homeowners evicting people who had no right to be there for whatever reason, including non payment of rent?

>>in accordance with the law, the council must provide us with alternative accommodation."<<

Squatters may not have good education but they sure have "street smarts" so once again the 'criminal' is protected in SA!


Report Abuse

Aug 23, 2012

candilious

Its about time ............clean our Coutry up.



@LBS-Morning ...........Lol hehehehehhehehehhe to the point


@Sin - ken jy van dommer as grond .........lol
Report Abuse

Aug 23, 2012

cornelius

The simple fact is that in terms of the Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Occupation of Land Act ( known as the PIE Act) , no person may beremoved from his/her home without a court order. An application for eviction must be made to court, and the court must consider a host of factors, to utlimately establish whether it would be " just and equitable" to evict. The PIE Act does not only protect occupiers but also the rights of land owners.

It is amazing that the JHB City tried to do this without a court order, they are going to get a mouthful in court, thats for sure.

Even in the much lambasted Western Cape, no municipality would try such a stunt.
Report Abuse

Aug 23, 2012

Bahaeso

Charles Ginida : where are the monies (R2500 per squatter ) which you have collected from those poor people and where do they come from. I am from Alex and I definitely know that those people who were being evicted there do not even have a month there. As for the Lawyers for human rights, who do they think they are to say anyone from anywhere could and should erect a shack on any piece of land and when they are evicted demand alternative accomodation, at whose expenses. The government does not have unilimited funds to build alternative accomodation for anyone and everyone from " i dont know where" . It is the same LHR which has been encouraging squatters and thugs to hijack buildings in the inner city and run them down. It is about time we march on the LHR and change this destructive constitution.
Report Abuse

Read all 6 comments