Court dismisses bid to halt eviction
Hundreds of people living in a condemned Pretoria building face an uncertain future after the High Court dismissed an urgent bid to prevent their removal. The ruling, handed down late on Thursday afternoon, means the planned relocation of occupants from the Melgisedek building could proceed despite fierce opposition from civil society groups and affected residents.
The civil rights organisation AfriForum had sought a temporary interdict earlier in the week to suspend the removal of those occupying the building illegally. However, Judge Mncedisi Patrick Khumalo ruled that the application failed to satisfy the legal threshold for urgency. He further noted that AfriForum had alternative legal remedies available, including lodging an appeal or bringing a review application.
The eviction order at the centre of the dispute was granted on 3 March, directing that occupants vacate the premises within seven days. The City of Tshwane secured the order after inspectors declared the building unfit for human habitation, describing it as extremely dangerous for anyone living inside. Municipal authorities argued that upwards of 450 individuals had moved into the structure near the Steve Biko Academic Hospital over the years, contributing to a surge in criminal activity in the surrounding area.
Relocation concerns remain unresolved
AfriForum stepped into the matter after learning that the metro planned to transfer residents to a temporary settlement in Gezina, situated at the intersection of Nico Smith Street and Johan Heyns Drive. The organisation raised serious objections about the suitability of the proposed site, warning that the move posed significant threats to safety, public health and community order. It also accused the municipality of failing to engage meaningfully with residents and other stakeholders before pushing ahead with the plan.
AfriForum's Pretoria spokesperson, Llewellynn Hemmens, pointed out troubling shortcomings in the relocation arrangements. He noted that the temporary tents at the proposed site could house only six people each, with total capacity for just 270 individuals — far short of the more than 450 currently residing in the building. He added that only 10 portable toilets had been arranged for the entire group.
"We respect the court's decision, but differ fundamentally from the outcome. The reality remains that the metro is imposing an ill-considered and harmful decision on an established community. The decision will have far-reaching consequences for the Moot's residents."
Hemmens stressed that the dispute extended beyond a single neighbourhood, touching on the broader principle of government accountability. He argued that the municipality could not keep addressing crises by merely shifting problems from one area to another, calling such an approach neither sustainable nor fair to the Moot community or the Melgizedek occupants.
The legal team representing the building's residents, Legal Professionals for Human Rights, is already preparing an urgent application to the Court of Appeal. AfriForum is weighing up whether to join those proceedings as a party or to lodge its own appeal against Judge Khumalo's decision.
"Our legal team will now thoroughly study the verdict and determine what further legal and civil steps can be taken, but this case is far from over."
That assurance came from Arno Roodt, who heads AfriForum's community structures in the northern region. In the meantime, the organisation has pledged to maintain pressure on the metro while monitoring developments on the ground. It also plans to collaborate with the local community in pursuit of safety, order and lasting solutions. The DA has separately indicated that it intends to file its own urgent court application to intervene in the matter.
South Africans facing housing insecurity will watch this case closely, as it tests the balance between building safety enforcement and the constitutional right to adequate shelter. The relocation of over 450 people to a site with insufficient capacity could strain surrounding communities and public services in Gezina. With multiple legal challenges now being prepared by different parties, the outcome may set a precedent for how municipalities handle similar evictions from condemned buildings nationwide.
