Protecting Human Rights amidst Poverty and Inequality: The South African Post-apartheid Experience on the Right of Access to Housing

2008 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 130-146 ◽  
Author(s):  
John C. Mubangizi

AbstractA significant gain of the new political and constitutional dispensation ushered in South Africa in 1994 was a commitment to the protection of human rights. However, protecting human rights in a country where the gap between the rich and the poor is among the largest in the world was always going to be a daunting challenge. The challenge is even more daunting with the protection of socio-economic rights such as the right of access to adequate housing. This article explores the challenges that South Africa faces in protecting human rights in the face of persistent poverty of over half of the country's population, vast economic disparities and gross inequality. Focusing on the right of access to adequate housing, the author explores some prospects arising from the roles played by the constitution; domestic courts; other state institutions as well as non-state actors. The article concludes that although the challenges are real, the prospects are promising. However, a lot must be done if the democratic miracle that has characterized South African society over the last fifteen years is to be maintained.

Author(s):  
N Gabru

Human life, as with all animal and plant life on the planet, is dependant upon fresh water. Water is not only needed to grow food, generate power and run industries, but it is also needed as a basic part of human life. Human dependency upon water is evident through history, which illustrates that human settlements have been closely linked to the availability and supply of fresh water. Access to the limited water resources in South Africa has been historically dominated by those with access to land and economic power, as a result of which the majority of South Africans have struggled to secure the right to water. Apartheid era legislation governing water did not discriminate directly on the grounds of race, but the racial imbalance in ownership of land resulted in the disproportionate denial to black people of the right to water. Beyond racial categorisations, the rural and poor urban populations were traditionally especially vulnerable in terms of the access to the right.  The enactment of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa 1996, brought the South African legal system into a new era, by including a bill of fundamental human rights (Bill of Rights). The Bill of Rights makes provision for limited socio-economic rights. Besides making provision for these human rights, the Constitution also makes provision for the establishment of state institutions supporting constitutional democracy.  The Constitution has been in operation since May 1996. At this stage, it is important to take stock and measure the success of the implementation of these socio-economic rights. This assessment is important in more ways than one, especially in the light of the fact that many lawyers argued strongly against 1/2the inclusion of the second and third generation of human rights in a Bill of Rights. The argument was that these rights are not enforceable in a court of law and that they would create unnecessary expectations of food, shelter, health, water and the like; and that a clear distinction should be made between first generation and other rights, as well as the relationship of these rights to one another. It should be noted that there are many lawyers and non-lawyers who maintained that in order to confront poverty, brought about by the legacy of apartheid, the socio-economic rights should be included in a Bill of Rights. The inclusion of section 27 of the 1996 Constitution has granted each South African the right to have access to sufficient food and water and has resulted in the rare opportunity for South Africa to reform its water laws completely. It has resulted in the enactment of the Water Services Act 108 of 1997 and the National Water Act 36 of 1998.In this paper the difference between first and second generation rights will be discussed. The justiciability of socio-economic rights also warrants an explanation before the constitutional implications related to water are briefly examined. Then the right to water in international and comparative law will be discussed, followed by a consideration of the South African approach to water and finally, a few concluding remarks will be made.


Author(s):  
Anél Terblanche ◽  
Gerrit Pienaar

Various South African government reports list food security as a development priority. Despite this prioritisation and despite the fact that South Africa is currently food self-sufficient, ongoing food shortages remain a daily reality for approximately 35 percent of the South African population. The government's commitment to food security to date of writing this contribution manifests in related policies, strategies, programmes and sectoral legislation with the focus on food production, distribution, safety and assistance. A paradigm shift in the international food security debate was encouraged during 2009, namely to base food security initiatives on the right to sufficient food. During a 2011 visit to South Africa, the Special Rapporteur for the Right to Food of the United Nations, accordingly confirmed that a human rights-based approach to food security is necessary in the South African legal and policy framework in order to address the huge disparities in terms of food security (especially concerning geography, gender and race). A human rights-based approach to food security will add dimensions of dignity, transparency, accountability, participation and empowerment to food security initiatives. The achievement of food security is further seen as the realisation of existing rights, notably the right of access to sufficient food. The right of access to sufficient food, as entrenched in section 27(1)(b) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 will accordingly play a central role within a human rights-based approach to food security. Section 27(2) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 qualifies section 27(1)(b) by requiring the state to take reasonable legislative and other measures, within its available resources, to achieve the progressive realisation of each of the section 27(1) rights. The South African government's commitment to food security, as already mentioned, currently manifests in related policies, strategies and programmes, which initiatives will qualify as other measures as referred to in section 27(2) mentioned above. This contribution, however, aims to elucidate the constitutional duty to take reasonable legislative measures as required by section 27(2) within the wider context of food security. This contribution is more specifically confined to the ways in which a human rights-based approach to food security can be accommodated in a proposed framework law as a national legislative measures. Several underlying and foundational themes are addressed in this contribution, amongst others: (a) the relationship between food security and the right of access to sufficient food; (b) food security as a developmental goal; and (c) the increasing trend to apply a human rights-based approach to development initiatives in general, but also to food security.


Author(s):  
M K Ingle

The Bill of Rights contained within South Africa’s Constitution features a number of ‘socio- economic rights’. Although these rights are justiciable they are subject to various limitations. They generally entail a positive onus on the part of the state to provide some good – not immediately, but ‘progressively’. Women have a direct interest in the realization of these rights and, where given effect to, they should exert a positive developmental impact. Some authorities are, however, of the opinion that socio-economic rights are not really enforceable. This article contends that the provision of social goods, by the state, should be the concomitant of the disciplined implementation of policy. Delivery should not therefore be contingent upon the legalistic vagaries of the human rights environment.Keywords: Socio-economic rights; justiciability; Bill of Rights; development; South African Constitution; womenDisciplines: Development Studies;Human Rights; Gender Studies; Political Science


2019 ◽  
pp. 103-122
Author(s):  
Rhonda Powell

Drawing on the analysis of security in Chapter 3 and the capabilities approach in Chapter 4, Chapter 5 provides examples of the interests that the right to security of person protects. It also considers the extent to which human rights law already recognizes a link between those interests and security of person. Five overlapping examples are discussed in turn: life, the means of life, health, privacy and the home, and autonomy. Illustrations are brought primarily from the European Convention on Human Rights, the Canadian Charter, and the South African Bill of Rights jurisprudence. It is argued that protection against material deprivations that threaten a person’s existence are as much part of the right to personal security as protection against physical assaults. The right to security of person effectively overcomes the problematic distinction between civil and political rights and socio-economic rights because it sits in both categories.


2011 ◽  
Vol 51 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 521-540 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tracy Humby ◽  
Maryse Grandbois

The right of access to sufficient water in the South African Constitution has for long been regarded as progressive in a global context where the human right to water is still a subject of contention. In its recent decision handed down in the Mazibuko matter, the South African Constitutional Court interpreted the right of access to sufficient water for the first time and clarified the nature of the State’s obligations which flow from this right. It also commented upon the role of the courts in adjudicating the human right to water. This article describes the passage of the Mazibuko matter and the manner in which the lower courts interpreted the right of access to “sufficient water” as well as outlining the Constitutional Court’s decision in the context of access to water services provision in South Africa.


Refuge ◽  
2013 ◽  
pp. 107-116
Author(s):  
Justin De Jager

South African society bears a legacy of inequality and struggle against oppression. In the Constitutional era, our courts have held that the right to equality is a core fundamental value against which all law and state practice must be tested. South Africa’s Equality Courts have been heralded as a transformative mechanism for the redressing of systemic inequality and the promotion of the right to equality. Following the aftermath of the 2008 xenophobic attacks in South Africa, the University of Cape Town Refugee Law Clinic, on behalf of some of the victims of these attacks, launched equality claims against the South African Police Services in order to address the unfair discrimination and xenophobia of police officials in protecting these victims. This paper reviews the two matters launched by the Clinic in the Equality Courts, examining the challenges that effectively reduce the accessibility of the Equality Courts and the difficulty inherent in proving discrimination in equality claims, and commenting on the benefits of using these courts to address xenophobia.


Author(s):  
I Mc Murray ◽  
L Jansen Van Rensburg

Children being the most vulnerable members of society are the one's most affected by living in poverty. This unacceptable situation can inter alia be attributed to the disastrous effects of Apartheid. During this unfortunate period in our nation's history millions of people were unjustly evicted from their homes and forced to live in deplorable conditions. Moreover, many of these people were left homeless or without the necessary adequate shelter. Children who were born into these circumstances were denied basic resources such as proper shelter, food, water and health care services. These unfortunate circumstances existed at the adoption of South Africa 's democratic Constitution. The preamble of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa , 1996 reaffirms government's commitment to heal the inequalities of the past and improve the quality of life of all citizens. The Constitution is based on certain fundamental values, most importantly, human dignity, freedom and equality. The fact that these values are denied to those people living without access to basic resources such as adequate housing/shelter, food, water or health care services cannot be dismissed. To facilitate South Africa 's development as a democratic state based on human dignity, freedom and equality, the problem of poverty must be addressed. The Constitutional Court , in Government of the Republic of South Africa and Others v Grootboom and Others 2000 11 BCLR 1169 (CC), has recently stated that the effective realisation of socio-economic rights is key to the advancement of a value based democratic South Africa . Section 26 of the Constitution grants everyone the right to have access to adequate housing and section 28 that grants every child the additional right to basic shelter among others. By virtue of section 28(1)(b) the primary responsibility to provide children with the necessary adequate housing/shelter is vested in their parents, unless the parents are unable to fulfil their duty or the children are removed from their care. This does not in the least mean that the state has no responsibilities to children living with their parents. The state must still provide the framework in which parents can facilitate the realisation of their children's rights. The state can fulfil this obligation by taking reasonable legislative and other measures within its available resources to realise everyone's right of access to adequate housing progressively.  Therefore, it is submitted that the measures taken to realise section 26 also indirectly ensures the realisation of children's right to basic shelter (section 28(1)(c)). It has been largely accepted by the courts and academics alike that all fundamental human rights are indivisible and interrelated. Clearly then, the state's obligations in terms of section 28(1)(c) cannot be properly interpreted without referring to the interpretation of those obligations conferred upon it by section 26(2) and the other socio-economic rights in the Constitution. Hence, section 28(1)(c) must be seen in the context of the Constitution as a whole. Put simply, the state must take reasonable legislative and other measures within its available resources to realise children's right to basic housing/shelter progressively. This article will focus on the utilisation of the right to shelter of the child to alleviate poverty. Essential to this discussion is an effective understanding of the right to basic shelter as entrenched by section 28 of the Constitution in conjunction with the right of access to adequate housing conferred on everyone by virtue of section 26. This will be achieved by studying the general working of such rights including their limitations and enforcement. 


2015 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 62-64
Author(s):  
Bernard Janse van Rensburg

Although psychiatrists did not form part of the structures of the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC), the Society of Psychiatrists of South Africa (SPSA) at the time did make a submission. Since then, the local association of psychiatrists has been reconstituted as the South African Society of Psychiatrists (SASOP). Psychiatry and psychiatrists may have to extend their activities beyond rehabilitation and restoration, to include endeavours to prevent future violations of human rights.


Politeia ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Khaled Qasaymeh ◽  
Jo-Ansie Karina Van Wyk

The provision and distribution of and access to electricity are not only technical and economic matters. Access to electricity is a highly political and ideological issue and has consequences for public policy and human development. Since 2000, South Africa has experienced power outages (euphemistically called load-shedding) and the country has not kept up with increased electricity and socio-economic demands. Globally, access to electricity is increasingly regarded as a basic human right and an important contributor to socio-economic development. However, the position towards and the practice regarding access to electricity by the post-apartheid South African government are contradictory. Although both the South African Bill of Rights and the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa of 1996 refer to fundamental human rights, the matter of access to electricity as a human right is not clearly spelled out in these documents. This article outlines international and African norms in respect of the right of access to electricity in the context of the international socio-economic development debate. It proceeds to examine the South African context, policies, legislation and constitutional court judgments in respect of socio-economic development with a special focus on access to electricity—a matter which is closely linked to political, public policy and development issues such as housing and the environment in South Africa. The article calls for the right of access to electricity to be declared a basic human right and to be legislated as such in the South African legal regime.


2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 1029-1051
Author(s):  
Rashri Baboolal-Frank ◽  
Fola Adeleke

Abstract In South Africa, the Promotion of Access to Information Act 2 of 2000 (PAIA) gives effect to the right of access information in Section 32 of the South African Constitution (the Constitution). Section 7 of PAIA provides that PAIA does not apply to records required for criminal or civil proceedings after commencement of proceedings where access to that record is already provided for in any other law. Where records are obtained in contravention of Section 7, they are not admissible as evidence in criminal or civil proceedings. The aim of this paper is to determine whether the discovery rules of Court limit the constitutional right of everyone to access information. Consequently, the methodology employed in this paper involves a legal analysis namely: a limitations analysis utilising Section 36, the limitations clause of the Constitution. This paper further engages in case law analysis interpreting the exercise of the right of access to information before PAIA was passed and after PAIA was passed to highlight the anomaly of the application of Section 7. This paper argues that Section 7 unconstitutionally limits the ambit of the right of access to information and a direct constitutional challenge on this provision is necessary.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document