In South Africa, more than 300 people went to the Johannesburg High Court to challenge eviction orders from the City Council.
The eviction orders went out to the residents of six buildings claimed by the City Council to be a health hazard. The City Council claimed public interest on their side, saying that if the residents' application to the High Court were successful the entire rejuvenation of the inner city would be at stake. In their submission to the High Court, Lawyers representing the residents argued that the City's duty to protect residents' safety did not defeat the duty to ensure access to affordable accommodation, i.e. the residents would be "far worse off" if evicted.
Such evictions in Johannesburg's inner city are ordered by courts on grounds of safety and health by-law violations; the defence team want this eviction policy changed to reflect the reality on the ground. A research officer for the Centre for Applied Legal Studies, Stuart Wilson, commented on the average monthly earnings of the residents of the disputed buildings - R1000 - compared to the minimum monthly earnings of R3500 required to rent social housing. He said some 82,000 people in Johannesburg, who do not qualify for social housing provided by government, could face forced eviction if the eviction policy remains unchecked. There are believed to be around 60 orders outstanding.
Of the six disputed buildings, four are condemned. The majority of residents live in the buildings illegally, including all of the residents of one building, which the City bought for its Better Building project after the owner defaulted on rates. According to the lawyers representing the residents, the rental is unlikely to be affordable for the current residents once the building is renovated.
The residents of the six disputed buildings say the Building Standards Act is unconstitutional because it does not require that eviction proceedings take into account the severe lack of affordable accommodation. After significant external pressure at the end of last year, the City Council approved plans to build some 1000 units with shared facilities, which are to be built over the next two years, to address the problem of a lack of affordable accommodation for this sector of low-income households. Critics, however, point out that not enough is being done and demand will continue to far outweigh the availability of such accommodation.
Meanwhile, an inspection tour was made of inner city living conditions, which included lawyers from both sides and Johannesburg High Court Judge Mahomed Jajbhay; they found grim and unsanitary conditions, including flowing raw sewerage in a building basement.
You can read more about this issue at www.businessday.co.za.
Squatters take Jo'burg to court over evictions
Business Day, 07 February 2006
Nidia Lopez called for immediate assistance for 23 homeless families living on the street in a Venezuelan barrio (poorest-of-the-poor urban neighbourhood), in an address made to the barrio's Urban Land Committee, known in Spanish as Comites de Tierras Urbanas (CTU). Specifically, Lopez recommended that allegations of the corrupt sale of a mansion should be investigated, and, pending confirmation of wrongful occupation and continued state ownership, that the estate should be confiscated on behalf of the 23 families.
A Presidential Decree issued by Hugo Chavez in 2004 gave rise to the CTUs by granting families, who could prove they built their home, the right to apply to the Technical Office for Urban Land Tenancy and Regulation (OTNRTTU) for title to the land, providing they joined with 100 to 200 other families to form a CTU. The CTUs thus embody Chavez's drive for radical change under the principals of social organisation, the right to a home as sacred, and participatory democracy.
Many of Venezuela's elite fear that the masses, equipped with social organisation and a legal mandate from the government for the transfer of property rights to people living in the barrios, will turn their attention to outside the barrios. This fear has been exacerbated by Lopez's stance, notwithstanding the suspicion of wrongful ownership of the mansion in question.
You can read more about this issue at www.venezuelanalysis.com. Significantly, whilst most CTU members are pro-Chavez, anti-Chavez Venezuelans participate in them too; CTUs are thought to be the most widely accepted form of participatory democracy in Venezuela at the moment. Others have been critical of the worth of a title to a home, which is in effect a slum home, but the Chavez administration is quick to point out the strength of people ownership over the development of their communities, including a new sense of pride in the barrio since the establishment of the CTUs. Another fair point, the European social housing model is said to look less attractive since the 40 days rioting in the suburbs of Paris.
Also unique to Venezuela, vast oil profits are used to benefit its inhabitants. The CTUs are able to tap into these funds too, so people have the means to develop their communities in the ways they decide fit. This mobilization, kick-started by the government, is nevertheless independent of government; the CTUs are set to dramatically improve the lives of Venezuela's poorest citizens by placing the means to influencing change within the people's reach.
Venezuela's Urban Land Committees and Participatory
Venezuelanalysis.com, 11 February 2006