Four months after hundreds of homes were demolished, the Eastern Cape high court has set aside the eviction order obtained by the Agricultural Research Council (ARC) against occupiers in Bhongweni on Farm 1345.
The rescission judgment overturns an order granted on November 28 2024, which declared the occupiers’ presence in the Cove Ridge East area unlawful and authorised their eviction and the demolition of their structures.
Acting judge Nomthandazo Ntlama-Makhanya ruled that the occupiers had shown good cause for the order to be rescinded.
“The applicants submitted that they were not before court when the order was granted and thus, they could not defend themselves,” she said.
“The first respondent (ARC) opposed the rescission, maintaining that the applicants were aware of the legal proceedings and had been represented.”
The November 2024 order followed an earlier rule issued on May 10 2024.
In that order, the court found that the occupiers had unlawfully invaded, grabbed, occupied, deforested and erected structures on Farm 1345, East London Road, under title deed T6127/1994.
They were interdicted from occupying the land, ordered to demolish and remove their structures, and directed to vacate the farm by February 26 2025.
The sheriff was authorised, with assistance if necessary, to evict them if they failed to comply.
The national police commissioner was directed to arrest and remove anyone remaining on the property after the deadline.
Judge Ntlama-Makhanya noted, however, that the November order expressly excluded Yandisa Sawula and respondents who had filed confirmatory affidavits in related proceedings.
A separate order granted in February 2020 under case number EL54/2020 remained applicable to Sawula and that group.
The court also outlined how the eviction order was to be served on unidentified occupiers.
The sheriff was authorised to hand copies to those present. If names could not be established, the order could be affixed to a notice board at the entrance to the farm and to any available tree, structure or building.
It was this order, later executed and resulting in widespread demolitions, that became the subject of the rescission application.
In her judgment, Ntlama-Makhanya found that the applicants could not simply be treated as part of the earlier group.
“The applicants could not be put in the ‘same basket’ as Yandisa Sawula and her group because the order itself was clear in that regard,” she said.
She said the November 2024 order had major consequences for people who were not properly before the court and who had not filed affidavits in the original proceedings.
“I am satisfied that the applicants had demonstrated that the non-appearance in court was reasonable,” she ruled.
“They had proved the fulfilment of the requirements of rescission.”
The court made no order as to costs.
The ruling means the ARC can no longer rely on the November 2024 order to evict residents of Farm 1345.
Any enforcement of that order, including the demolition of structures or removal of occupiers, is now invalid.
The sheriff and police are no longer authorised to act under it.
If the ARC wishes to pursue eviction, it will have to return to court.
The merits of the occupation will be decided at a later stage.
For residents who lost their homes, the decision has brought mixed emotions.
Vuyolwethu Matafeni said she rebuilt a temporary structure after her home was demolished.
“I took a risk and rebuilt a temporary structure after they demolished because that was the only home my two children had,” she said.
“I hope ARC would give us the land and build us proper houses.”
Thobile Hute said he was staying with a friend.
“I am staying at a friend’s house until I find another place to live. I believe we deserve an explanation from the company on why they destroyed our homes,” he said.
The EFF in the East London sub-region welcomed the ruling, describing it as a historic victory.
EFF sub-regional communications officer Lucinda Sikwana said the judgment confirmed the party’s long-standing view that the demolition order had been flawed.
“This judgment is a historic and political victory. It sets aside a demolition order that had already been unlawfully executed, resulting in the destruction of hundreds of homes,” she said.
She said the rescission confirmed that the order had been “procedurally defective, misapplied and weaponised against defenceless families”.
“The reckless and hurried execution of court orders, particularly eviction and demolition orders, has irreversible and violent consequences on the livelihoods of marginalised communities,” Sikwana said.
“State entities cannot hide behind court processes while ignoring the human cost of their actions.”
The EFF also criticised the ARC, which falls under the department of agriculture, accusing it of acting like a hostile landlord rather than a public institution.
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.