SA National Parks (SANParks) has made the shock announcement that it is withdrawing from the Western Cape High Court application to remove illegal shack dwellers from the slopes of the Sentinel above Hout Bay – a move that Premier Helen Zille claims is as a result of political pressure from the ANC.
SANParks is the first applicant in this court action, and the decision – by chief executive Dr David Mabunda – has ratcheted up tension in an already fraught relationship with the City of Cape Town, the second applicant in the matter which is due to be heard in court again on October 18.
Two weeks ago Hangberg residents and authorities clashed violently when the city attempted to dismantle more than 20 shacks on the slopes of the Sentinel above Hangberg.
The latest move led Zille to accuse SANParks of buckling under ANC pressure, with potentially dire consequences for the Table Mountain National Park (TMNP) in particular.
Zille said she had it on good authority that direct political pressure at the highest level had been brought to bear on SANParks to abandon its legal mandate, which was to safeguard national parks.
Describing the pressure on SANParks as “unconstitutional and unlawful”, she said: “This is outrageous political interference in an independent mandate to protect our parks.
“Ten days ago, SANParks argued that it was a matter of urgency. This U-turn is a direct result of the policy of cadre deployment. The ANC’s political agenda trumps everything else – this time, the importance of conservation and our national parks.”
Today provincial Cosatu leader Tony Ehrenreich admitted he had suggested to the government that SANParks’ legal action was “not in the national interest”.
Asked if a dangerous precedent was being set, he said he agreed with the principle of conservation but all matters had to be judged on their own merits. He believed the urban edge demarcations and the fire break at Hangberg were “arbitrary”.
TMNP officials told their city counterparts yesterday about the decision to withdraw from the legal action.
Council spokeswoman Kylie Hatton said park officials had said Mabunda had instructed them to withdraw in the belief this would allow the situation to cool down and a settlement to be negotiated.
“Our position is that we believe we can still try to find an amicable solution, even if the court case continues,” Hatton said.
“Advice from our legal representatives is that our application can go ahead, and the process is still under way.”
In founding affidavits in the High Court application first heard last Thursday, SANParks made it clear why it wants the illegal shacks to go.
Part of the court order said: “(SANParks and the city) say that houses in this area pose a fire risk, are unsafe, that this area is not suitable for occupation, and that nobody should be permitted to live above the ‘sloot’.”
The sloot is a drainage channel built by the city to divert water from the occupied part of Hangberg into the sea.
In his affidavit, TMNP manager Paddy Gordon said SANParks had “statutory obligations” with regard to the land.
“The removal of the informal structures from above the sloot is imperative for reasons of health and safety…
“There are no dictates of justice or considerations of equity known to me which would militate in favour of the continued occupation by respondents of the erven in question, or – conversely – which would render their eviction unjust or inequitable…”
The acting mayor of Cape Town, Ian Neilsen, said today: “We are very unhappy with their withdrawal. They are required by law to take action against people who invade their property.”
SANParks’ media relations manager, Reynold Thakhuli, today denied any pressure had been applied. The organisation had pulled out of the court case in order to resolve the matter more “amicably”.
“As you aware, there have been a lot of communication breakdowns, which has led the situation to have escalated.”
It was pointed out to Thakuli that tensions had escalated long before the court action began. In response, Thakuli again denied any pressure.
Sputnik Ratau, spokesman for Environment Minister Buyelwa Sonjica, said on Wednesday: “The minister has not applied any political pressure on SANParks.” He said no further comment was necessary.
- Cape Argus
SANParks is the first applicant in this court action, and the decision – by chief executive Dr David Mabunda – has ratcheted up tension in an already fraught relationship with the City of Cape Town, the second applicant in the matter which is due to be heard in court again on October 18.
Two weeks ago Hangberg residents and authorities clashed violently when the city attempted to dismantle more than 20 shacks on the slopes of the Sentinel above Hangberg.
The latest move led Zille to accuse SANParks of buckling under ANC pressure, with potentially dire consequences for the Table Mountain National Park (TMNP) in particular.
Zille said she had it on good authority that direct political pressure at the highest level had been brought to bear on SANParks to abandon its legal mandate, which was to safeguard national parks.
Describing the pressure on SANParks as “unconstitutional and unlawful”, she said: “This is outrageous political interference in an independent mandate to protect our parks.
“Ten days ago, SANParks argued that it was a matter of urgency. This U-turn is a direct result of the policy of cadre deployment. The ANC’s political agenda trumps everything else – this time, the importance of conservation and our national parks.”
Today provincial Cosatu leader Tony Ehrenreich admitted he had suggested to the government that SANParks’ legal action was “not in the national interest”.
Asked if a dangerous precedent was being set, he said he agreed with the principle of conservation but all matters had to be judged on their own merits. He believed the urban edge demarcations and the fire break at Hangberg were “arbitrary”.
TMNP officials told their city counterparts yesterday about the decision to withdraw from the legal action.
Council spokeswoman Kylie Hatton said park officials had said Mabunda had instructed them to withdraw in the belief this would allow the situation to cool down and a settlement to be negotiated.
“Our position is that we believe we can still try to find an amicable solution, even if the court case continues,” Hatton said.
“Advice from our legal representatives is that our application can go ahead, and the process is still under way.”
In founding affidavits in the High Court application first heard last Thursday, SANParks made it clear why it wants the illegal shacks to go.
Part of the court order said: “(SANParks and the city) say that houses in this area pose a fire risk, are unsafe, that this area is not suitable for occupation, and that nobody should be permitted to live above the ‘sloot’.”
The sloot is a drainage channel built by the city to divert water from the occupied part of Hangberg into the sea.
In his affidavit, TMNP manager Paddy Gordon said SANParks had “statutory obligations” with regard to the land.
“The removal of the informal structures from above the sloot is imperative for reasons of health and safety…
“There are no dictates of justice or considerations of equity known to me which would militate in favour of the continued occupation by respondents of the erven in question, or – conversely – which would render their eviction unjust or inequitable…”
The acting mayor of Cape Town, Ian Neilsen, said today: “We are very unhappy with their withdrawal. They are required by law to take action against people who invade their property.”
SANParks’ media relations manager, Reynold Thakhuli, today denied any pressure had been applied. The organisation had pulled out of the court case in order to resolve the matter more “amicably”.
“As you aware, there have been a lot of communication breakdowns, which has led the situation to have escalated.”
It was pointed out to Thakuli that tensions had escalated long before the court action began. In response, Thakuli again denied any pressure.
Sputnik Ratau, spokesman for Environment Minister Buyelwa Sonjica, said on Wednesday: “The minister has not applied any political pressure on SANParks.” He said no further comment was necessary.
- Cape Argus
No comments:
Post a Comment