News

Mobilisation and capacitation of community organizations around their own resources and knowledge is the Alliance’s approach for securing delivery and deepening democracy.

The first point of departure is generally the enumeration of an identified settlement.  The objective of these enumerations is on one side to ensure that its development interventions create concrete frameworks, which allow slum dweller beneficiaries to constructively engage with the State and other role-players. This means that through the pilot project partnership, new pacts between local government and organized communities will be established to build the trust, reciprocity and developmental practices required to imagine, design and implement sustainable neighbourhoods. On the other side, enumerations help to develop the network’s capacity to restructure human settlements in a way that challenges the spatial barriers created by colonial and current design politics, introducing integrated planning strategies, which take into account environmental and economic conditions.

The Alliance is currently mobilizing dozens of informal settlements throughout the country through these household surveys. Please view the full reports on how the process worked for the Cape Town communities of Joe Slovo, Sheffield Road, Barcelona and Europe in the DOCS section of the SA SDI Alliance website.

By Andrea Bolnick, Ikhayalami

Ruimsig Informal Settlement is located on the West Rand and is part of the Greater Johannesburg Metropolitan area. The settlement also sits on the border of another municipality, Mogale City, and this duality often causes confusion with regard to the two cities’ responsibilities and leads to frustration on the part of the residents.

The Informal Settlement covers an area of 5.2 hectors and is situated in the heart of a middle to upper class residential area. This was not the case when the first residents of the settlement lived on the land in the mid 1980’s. The area was predominantly farmland. In 1986 the farm was sold to a new owner who started charging rent to the farm workers. A few other families came to live on the land and they too were charged rent.  In 1998 the Johannesburg Municipality bought the land. This was around the time when the area started shifting from a rural farmland setting to a more urban residential environment. This shift also brought more people to live in the settlement as job opportunities related to the building sector grew.

According to a survey that was conducted by the Informal Settlement community and CORC, the number of households is 369. Basic services are limited and include 70 Ventilated Improved Pit (VIP) toilets, which the City services once a year. Some of the toilets are difficult for the truck to get to due to shack congestion and bad roads, so these toilets are not serviced at all. There are three standpipes that are each connected to three water tanks in three different locations of the settlement. Of these water outlets, one is not working. The settlement has no electricity.

Residents of the settlement are tired of bad and unhealthy living conditions related to inadequate services and congestion. They have decided to help themselves. The residents are linked to a broad based national network of shack dwellers known as the Informal Settlement Network (ISN).  This network has adopted the approaches of Shack Dwellers International (SDI), following the rituals of community-based savings; community led surveying, horizontal exchanges from one community to another and community-led development.

Ruimsig Informal Settlement being part of the ISN was identified as one of the pilot project sites. The community identified the need to create a better layout for the settlement as one of its main priorities. With a better layout, issues of congestion and density can be addressed, safer areas for children to play can be created, a safer environment can be fostered, shacks can be improved and basic services can be upgraded – all of which will vastly improve the living conditions of its inhabitants. The SA SDI alliance name for reconfiguring an Informal Settlement’s layout is “blocking-out”.

In order to start the blocking-out process, an organization called Ikhayalami raised funds for the upgrading of 40 shelters. It is envisaged that through community contributions and savings additional funds will be raised so as to complete the re-blocking of the entire settlement. In order to augment a community design process a partnership was created between the Ruimsig community and the University of Johannesburg architecture department. For seven weeks students and community ‘architects’ worked together to develop a new layout for the settlement.

The local authorities from Region C of the Johannesburg Metro are in support of the blocking-out. General meetings have been held in the community with the local authorities demonstrating their support of the process.

Demarcation of sites and building of shelters into a better-reconfigured layout began on 5^th of October. The community is rallying behind the re-blocking process. Community savings and contributions towards the upgraded shelters is currently at R9 750 and growing hourly. The community is abuzz with activity and dynamism. Ruimsig is the second Informal Settlement to be blocked-out in South Africa. It is the intention of ISN, CORC and Ikhayalami for these two settlements to be precedent-setting, both for Informal Settlement communities and for the State.

An exhibition will soon open at the Goethe-Institut in Johannesburg, which will showcase the recent, successful partnership between the residents of Ruimsig, a small informal settlement on the north-western periphery of Johannesburg, the SA SDI Alliance and the University of Johannesburg, Department of Architecture.  Ruimsig serves as the site for a pioneering studio for architecture students which aims to highlight the necessity and challenges that come with in-situ upgrading in the informal context. Partnerships with the community, several NGOs, as well as the National Upgrade Support Programme (NUSP), have been put in place to ensure that the work produced by the students is closely informed by inhabitants’ immediate and long-term needs. Students, teachers and residents have worked together intensely, in a temporary studio in the settlement, to produce a map towards the sensitive ‘re­blocking’ (or site-specific formalisation) of Ruimsig. Apart from the primary re-blocking exercise, various site-specific strategies, for short and long-term upgrading and sustainable growth of the settlement, were also work-shopped and tested, together with the community.

On the 1st of September, the project outcomes were exhibited to community leaders and residents of Ruimsig, as well as to representatives from the SA SDI Alliance, NUSP, project partners and officials from the City of Johannesburg.

As a pilot project its significance is potentially catalytic as its realisation will exemplify government’s goal of upgrading 400 000 informal households by 2014. In this context, students collaborated with ‘Community Architects’ from Ruimsig over a period of seven weeks. The collaboration with Ruimsig residents led to the development and illustration of strategies for the sensitive community-driven upgrading and formalisation of the existing settlement. This exercise builds on the inherent spatial qualities of a settlement which has, over a period of more or less 25 years, grown and evolved into a vibrant, dynamic and self-designed place.

The exhibition at Goethe on Main, opening on Thursday, September 21, will make a summary of the project – and its layered and complex process – available to a broader public. The collected work on exhibition until the 2^nd October 2011 will portray, primarily through film, the challenging dynamics inherent in the teaching of this course, and the necessary shift required by architects, educators and officials to acknowledge and engage with the informal city and its networks.

For detailed documentation of the Ruimsig project and process, please visit http://informalstudioruimsig.tumblr.com/

By Andre Mengi, CORC

Residents from other informal settlements and ISN representatives support Bapsfontein’s legal fight against the eviction which took place earlier this year.

Following the discovery of the formation of sinkholes in the informal settlement of Bapsfontein in 2004, the Ekurhuleni Metro commissioned a geo-science investigation and declared Bapsfontein a “disaster zone”. The qualification of the informal settlement of Bapsfontein as a disaster zone led to the eviction of residents without a court order and their relocation without consulting them. Relocation took place from December 2010 to March 2011.

After unsuccessfully applying to the North High Court of Pretoria to stop the urgent relocation that was happening in the area, the residents of Bapsfontein  appealed the decision of the High Court which has found the relocation of Bapsfontein to be lawful. On Thursday 15 September, the judges of the constitutional court heard the application of the Bapsfontein residents who challenged the lawfulness of the Municipality’s decision to evict them without a court order and relocate them without their consent.

During the hearing, residents of other informal settlements of Ekurhuleni and  ISN (Informal Settlement Network) representatives of Gauteng were present to support the Bapsfontein residents. Although they were discreet, the media also was in the court room. The applicant (the Bapsfontein residents) challenged the Disaster Management Act (DMA) that the Municipality referred to to evict the residents without a court order and against their will. The applicant based his argument on the Article 26 and Section 3 of the act which states that: “Nobody can be evicted from his/her home without a court order”. The second part of the Article which raised controversy stipulates that “unless the legislation authorizes such an eviction”. The applicant argued that nowhere in the act it was written that people could be moved against their will. The applicant concluded that the eviction of the Bapsfontein residents without a court order and their relocation 20 km away from their home against their will was unlawful even if the municipality evoked the notion of emergency.

One judge wanted to know whether it was correct to affirm that people were relocated without being consulted or against their will. The applicant replied that people were consulted but the process was inadequate. The applicant has exposed the incoherence of the Municipality in saying that the city removed people from the informal settlement on the ground that the area constituted a danger for people. However, the same city made an arrangement to take children to school in the same area. The applicant asked if it was safe for the children to go back to school in the same informal settlement.

The residents of Bapsfontein are aware that the area constitutes a health hazard, and that the local authority has declared it a “disaster zone”. According to the applicant, the question that arises is where people want to live. One of the judges made an observation in advocating that in this case we should distinguish an evacuation due to an emergency and an arbitrary eviction. The applicant persisted in his argument in asking if a relocation could be done without people’s consent. The judge replied what about the case of an earthquake and the eruption of a volcano? Should a municipality go to  court first to obtain a court order before evacuating people even if it was evident that people’s lives are in danger? This question highlighted the limitations of the DMA. The applicant concluded his argument in pointing out that in the case of an emergency like the case of Bapsfontein, it was understandable that the Municipality had envisaged a temporary relocation. However, the big concern in the case of Bapsfontein is that Ekurhuleni Metro seems to turn this temporary relocation into a permanent eviction. He finished his argument in affirming that the residents are not unwilling to be relocated but they are very concerned about the distance between their work place and the relocation area.

The defence, representing the Ekurhuleni Metro, articulated their argument in defending the eviction of the Bapsfontein residents without a court order. He argued that the issue of reason which is for the Municipality to protect the life of their residents and the identification of suitable land should be applied in this case. The Municipality was concerned about people’s safety and did not find suitable land in the vicinity of Bapsfontein. The defence added that in this case the Municipality relied on voluntary relocation consisting of placing people where services are being provided. He insisted that the city manager consulted people three times before the relocation took place. The question here, according to the judges, is if the city manager consulted those who signed the consent form.

The constitutional judges made it very clear that they were bound by the constitution; therefore, the court would not tolerate an arbitrary eviction. The law authorizes evacuation but not an arbitrary eviction. In other words, arbitrary or not, eviction cannot happen without a court order. They added that the current legislation seeks to reverse the apartheid law where evictions could happen without a court order. The judges wanted to know firstly if the Municipality’s behaviour was justified by the fact that the residents of Bapsfontein were unlawful occupants. Secondly, if there is a difference between an eviction without a court order and an evacuation due to a disaster or an emergency. Finally, following the defence argument, the judges wanted to know whether the case is about an evacuation or an eviction. If the case is about an evacuation, the court will examine the circumstances in which people were evacuated. If it is an eviction case, why did the Ekurhuleni Metro undermine the Court, they asked. The chief justice raised an interesting point in asking the defence  outside the court, who should determine if the eviction is arbitrary or not?

The judges concluded their intervention in asking the defence that if the area was as dangerous as they claim, why were some people removed, but their children were brought back? The defence replied in saying that the area, where the schools are located, was  not dangerous. The judges added that the occurrence of sinkholes was seen as close as 100 m away from the informal settlement.

The constitutional court judges did not give their judgement, but will do so in a few days time.

By Kwanele Sibanda, CORC

The residents of Kaalfontein learn at an ISN mobilisation meeting from other slum dwellers

On the 3^rd of September 2011 the Tembisa Sub-regional dialogue was held. During the dialogue the Kaalfontein leaders made a request for the mobilisation of their settlement. As had been agreed upon in the dialogue, the ISN/FEDUP team went to the settlement on Sunday the 11^th of September 2011. The public meeting arranged by the Kaalfontein leaders was well attended by the community members. Besides the mobilising team members, three community members of Khayelitsha (a nearby settlement) were also present for the purpose of learning and also sharing their experiences with the community of Kaalfontein.

In the meeting, the mobilising team gave background of ISN and FEDUP and furthermore highlighted on some of the following;

• Importance of uniting as informal settlements

• Sharing of experience

• Importance of being equipped with information especially that of your own settlement as well as how the government operates.

• Taking part in engagements with the government as well as making follow ups on issues agreed upon.

The Khayelitsha members shared their experience of engaging with the local municipality. After the presentations, the community asked questions. Many of the community members were interested in knowing how the mobilising team members and perhaps their communities as well had benefitted from being part of the SDI alliance. In his response, Alfred told the community that the manner in which he has benefitted is beyond achieving a house as he has done, but the strength in terms of knowledge that he has gained through being exposed to other communities and getting to know the government’s policies and processes. He added that the knowledge gained by the alliance members has helped them in positioning themselves when engaging with the government.

In response to what Alfred said, one of the community members said: “Siyaqala apha emphakathini ukubona umuntu oseke wahlala emkhukhwini, waphumelela ngokuthola indlu wabuya wacabanga ukusiza abanye abasahlala emkhukhwini. Ngiyamcoma lobaba.” (“It is the first time in this community that we see someone who once lived in a shack and succeeded by getting a house, but still thinks of supporting those that still reside in shacks. I praise this man.”)

The other ISN members from recently mobilised settlements responded by saying that the government has started taking them seriously because they are part of a broader network – the ISN (Informal Settlement Network).

Below are the key issues brought to the attention of ISN by the community members of Kaalfontein:

• With more than 300 households in the settlement, they only have one water tap. Having one water tap is not the only problem. The tap is located about 500 m from the settlement and is across a railway line that has no bridge for pedestrians.
• The settlement has poor sanitation as they have no waste containers. They rely on burning waste that can be burnt.
• They have no electricity.
• Their shacks are directly under electrical cables.
• The settlement is more than 24 years and a number of people are employed at a nearby cement manufacturing company called Larfarge.
• The land that they settled on in owned by Intersite Investment that is a subsidiary of PRASA, the passenger Rail Agency of South Africa.

Since the community identified access to water as one of their biggest challenges, the ISN team requested the community to choose one representative to join the ISN team in a meeting that was on the same day going to be held with the MMC of Water and Energy for Ekurhuleni (Aubrey Nxumalo).

300 families share only one water tap in the informal settlement Kaalfontein

In the afternoon of the same day a meeting was held with the MMC. As the MMC spoke about his responsibilities, the Kaalfontein water issue was raised by one of the ISN members and the MMC responded by saying that before the weekend of the 24^th, the ISN team must make a follow up with him for he promises to deal with the matter before the aforementioned date.

The other community prioritised needs will fall as part of the ISN, Tembisa sub-regional programme.