CAPE TOWN, WESTERN CAPE — The Constitutional Court has ruled that the Western Cape government and the City of Cape Town failed to meet their constitutional obligations to provide affordable housing and address apartheid-era spatial inequality. The landmark judgment centers on the controversial proposed sale of the former Tafelberg school site in Sea Point, placing immediate pressure on authorities to prioritize well-located public land for marginalized communities.
At the heart of the legal battle is a prime piece of public land in one of Cape Town’s most sought-after suburbs. Housing activists successfully argued that the property should have been utilized for affordable housing rather than sold off by the city. The apex court determined that the provincial government acted unlawfully when it attempted to dispose of the Tafelberg property without properly consulting the national human settlements minister. This failure breached constitutional principles requiring cooperative governance across different spheres of government. Consequently, parts of the province’s land disposal regulations have been officially declared unconstitutional.
The justices emphasized that the ruling extends far beyond a single real estate transaction. The court found that both the Western Cape government and the City of Cape Town neglected to take reasonable measures to develop affordable housing in well-located areas near jobs, public transport, and essential services. Highlighting a severe lack of progress, the judgment noted there was little evidence that current housing pipelines would rectify these shortcomings anytime soon.
The court stated that by the time answering affidavits were filed, the city had not implemented any social or affordable housing projects in or near central Cape Town or its economic nodes in a manner that addresses spatial injustice. Stressing that adequate housing requires more than just a roof over one’s head, the court mandated that the government must actively reverse the partial inequalities created by apartheid spatial planning. Authorities are now barred from continuing the practice of situating affordable housing developments far from economic opportunities.
Furthermore, the judiciary was highly critical of the public participation process surrounding the land sale. Although thousands of public submissions were received, the court found that authorities had already finalized the disposal agreement before any meaningful engagement occurred. The province’s consultation was described as a mere “tick-box exercise” with minimal genuine receptiveness to public input.
Advocacy groups have welcomed the ruling as a monumental victory for ensuring public land is leveraged to tackle spatial inequality and expand access to well-located urban housing. Speaking on the significance of the verdict, advocates noted that the legal battle has been a decade in the making, and arguably more than 30 years considering South Africa’s history with apartheid. The judgment forces a critical reflection on the steps the country has taken to ensure citizens have access to well-located housing.
The Western Cape government and the City of Cape Town have been given a strict 12-month deadline to remedy the systemic issues and constitutional breaches identified in the Constitutional Court’s ruling.
