In my opinion
people of Lenasia are and will remain perplexed by language used by the
legislature (in this case, Mr. Tokyo Sexwale) as myself, or those who would
fall within the legal fraternity or those who will sit in the Constitutional
Court when the victims takes government to court, but the question is what will
be the offence laid to against government? It is said that when one destroys
property whether it belongs to him or her, s/he would be committing a criminal
offence called arson, and then my question is what is Pyromania if it is
committed by government as it is in this case? My last contribution to this
topic about two weeks ago, my concerns were and are still based on the fact
that the South African Constitution Act 108, of 1996 was created on the premise
that ‘statutes are said to be aimed at the promotion within the state of public
interest’.
After looking
and listening to the Minister in this case on SAFM yesterday, I could not
understand him when he accepted that “in future, demolitions are most probably
to continue” and that is what makes me not to understand the government which
was created on the bases that it will build houses for poor people. Let us
accept his explanation that yes people have built houses illegally on
government land, does that give government a right to destroy those illegally
built houses? Someone needs to educate me and make me understand this as I have
asked previously on this topic; are there no better way /solution that can be
used by government instead of moving towards this direction of destroying those
houses while poor people have applied for houses since the Mandela
administration? Can’t government use a strategy that will at least allocate
those houses to poor people who qualify for RDP houses instead of destroying?
Thus I need to know as to what criminal offence is government committing in
this case, please educate me so that I can understand. If banks have approved
those loans, who will pay them at the end? The approach seems to be not
assisting, thus I am appealing that those who are involved in this case should
not use emotions but come with solutions that will be of benefit to the poor.
If government was aware that people were building in government land, why has
it taken so long for the City of Jo’burg and the Department of Housing to come
with this approach?
When looking at
the verification processes advised by the Minister, is there any verification
done by government on RDP houses that are built since the Mandela
administration? Why will it be easy for this department to come with this
approach but not done so to its own way of doing things, does it mean that
government will be conducting the same audit in most of unsafe RDP houses that
were built by government since the Mandela administration? We would love to see
the same audit done in the area I live in such as Kenilworth, Turffontein,
Rosettenville, La Rochelle, Regents Park, and the Johannesburg CBD where
foreign nationals have occupied and hijacked houses illegally without any
government intervention while there are many people who have applied for RDP
houses but have not been allocated houses. Red tape, bureaucracy have been
dominating this department thus we see some of these challenges that we face as
a nation today and no one willing to take responsibility. I will use the
examples of people who have been failed by government while I was volunteering
for the La Rochelle PCO early around 2002 when these hijacking of properties
was becoming a daily thing, I would refer some of the cases to the Housing
Tribunal, but still our people were becoming victims since there was no clear
way of helping these people but some foreign national would come and take
properties without any prosecution done to these nationals. I would have
understood if government was saying it was going to take houses belonging to foreign
nationals and giving them to South African citizens who have been loyal and participating
in voting.
As for those who
have committed fraud and corruption, the minister has accepted that it is
people with money who might even go to the courts and would win some of the
cases since there are loopholes with our Constitution. The typical example
would be that, these people can use the example that government is taking too
long to deliver houses, thus they have come with strategies of speeding the
process of allocating land to the needy. They might have a case in this regard
if their intension was to do the job for some officials who have been dragging
their feet in the delivery of houses to the poor people. It would be up to the
legal people to take this up and challenge government, and might have a case
that judges can listen to. My call to legal companies will be to look at some
of these loopholes and start making money. The Constitutional Court could look
at how the aim of public interest could be used in looking whether government
actions were of the benefit of people or were of making a statement of showing
who is in charge here.
In the previous
correspondence I have raised the challenge that we face as a nation regarding
the Constitution Act 108 of 1996 in that it was only promulgated in the English
version, so how will an ordinary citizen acknowledge that the government has violated
their rights if they do not understand procedures that are followed in such cases.
I would foresee a situation where those who are legislatures, like our Minister,
makes it difficult for those who should interpreted the legislation and make it
easy for the ordinary lay man to understand. Thus I am as perplexed by this
case as those who are in the Human Rights Commission, Courts and those who
should come with solutions as those who will be taking the matter up and fight
for the ordinary victims who have lost their investments because someone up
there did not breathe before taking any action. Please educate me on this, I
will be looking at the developments of this case as it is becoming interesting
day by day.
http://zolisamemani.blogspot.com/
Little
Johnny's at it again..... A new teacher was trying to make use of her
psychology courses. She started her class by saying, 'Everyone who thinks
they're stupid, stand up!' After a few seconds, Little Johnny stood up. The
teacher said, 'Do you think you're stupid, Little Johnny?' 'No, ma'am, but I
hate to see you standing there all by yourself!'
