Constitutional Court says emergency shelter rules are unconstitutional
The rules at a shelter for those evicted from inner-city Joburg buildings negatively infringe on the dignity and privacy of residents, as well as perpetuate gender stereotypes
On December 1, the Constitutional Court handed down a judgment in the Dladla v City of Johannesburg case. It said the city had breached the rights of 11 people to whom it had provided temporary accommodation. The city provided former residents of Saratoga Avenue accommodation at the Ekuthuleni Shelter in Johannesburg’s inner city in 2012. When they got to the shelter, residents were subjected to the its rules, locking them out during the day and separating men and women into different dormitories. This meant heterosexual couples were separated and parents with children of the opposite sex were separated. Residents approached the Socio-Economic Rights Institute of SA (Seri), which took up their case and asked the Court to declare the shelter rules invalid because the rules negatively affect the dignity of residents. In the judgment, the Court found that the rules separating the residents’ families and locking them out during the day were in breach of the Constitution. The Dladla judg...
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.
Subscribe now to unlock this article.
Support BusinessLIVE’s award-winning journalism for R129 per month (digital access only).
There’s never been a more important time to support independent journalism in SA. Our subscription packages now offer an ad-free experience for readers.
Cancel anytime.
Questions? Email helpdesk@businesslive.co.za or call 0860 52 52 00. Got a subscription voucher? Redeem it now.