{"id":284514,"date":"2025-11-06T11:03:41","date_gmt":"2025-11-06T09:03:41","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/novanews.co.za\/tygerburger\/?p=284514"},"modified":"2026-02-19T15:57:06","modified_gmt":"2026-02-19T13:57:06","slug":"watch-we-dont-see-it-as-a-land-invasion-we-see-it-as-a-land-reclaiming","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/novanews.co.za\/tygerburger\/watch-we-dont-see-it-as-a-land-invasion-we-see-it-as-a-land-reclaiming\/","title":{"rendered":"WATCH | ‘We don’t see it as a land invasion, we see it as a land reclaiming’"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

The chief of the Strandfontein Aboriginal Khoisan Village Kraal said the community there was taking the lead in the \u201cfight against the DA\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe City actually did us a favour by putting it all over social media,\u201d Chief Wayne Fortuin said, referring to the outcome of the Western Cape High Court case brought by the City of Cape Town against the Khoisan community. \u201cChiefs from places that I didn\u2019t even know about are calling me and telling me this is happening where they are too.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On 31 October the court ruled in favour of the City of Cape Town\u2019s appeal to prevent the occupation of erfs 1212<\/a>, 1213, 1215 and 21168, where the City has several developments planned, including housing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

CLICK HERE TO VIEW JUDGEMENT:<\/strong> City of Cape Town v Johannes Rooyen and Another<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The long-running case was lodged in 2022, but Fortuin said the Khoisan community took the land over in 2020, after it had been abandoned. A plaque on the only brick building on the property said it was being used by \u201cchurch lads and girls\u201d. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThey basically left and just left the property in this way, and then the gangsters and the druggies came and started vandalising the house and even playing with guns and stuff. And then we, as the Khoisan, cleared them out of the house, cleared all the rubble out and we are trying to make it decent again. And that is when the problem started with the City and Law Enforcement.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

According to the court documents the City attempted to stop the invasion of the property via the courts after it had already dismantled several structures.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Fortuin, however, claims that the City has continually tried to intimidate the roughly 20 families living on the site by dismantling their structures and by stationing Law Enforcement officers permanently outside the kraal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Fortuin
Fortuin says metro police vans are permanently stationed outside the village.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThey have Law Enforcement here day and night, 24\/7. Those people are put there to monitor us. They\u2019re not worried about the safety in the area. People in the communities at the back have complained about stabbings and shootings they tell the people they are not there for that, they are here to monitor us. While the community is crying about the high crime rate, they are more worried about the land.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Lack of basic services<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Fortuin claims that the City has not provided them with basic services.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cWe’ve been here for five years. As you can see all of these places around us have sanitisation, they have lights, water, and we have to fend for ourselves. They refuse to do anything.” Fortuin was referring to the surrounding informal settlements. “The City does not want to give us basic services.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

According to the ruling the City\u2019s anti-land invasion interdicts are valid, and no-one at the site was evicted unlawfully. It said the Kraal villagers \u201cshowed reasonable threat of harm\u201d and \u201cdemonstrated no alternative remedies available\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Fortuin disputed this, saying the kraal was a \u201cpeaceful\u201d village. \u201cThe surrounding community says it is happy we are here because now they can walk through here again.\u201d He added several residents in the adjacent suburb had visited the kraal to learn about Khoisan culture and history and had become members of the organisation. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The court\u2019s ruling prohibits the group from building more structures on the property, but it cautioned the City against eviction: \u201cThis order shall not be construed as an eviction order. It shall not entitle the City to demolish any occupied structures at the date of this order or to use the provisions of this order for purposes of evicting occupiers from the property.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But Fortuin said the fight was not over and the chiefs will meet to decide their way forward.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cWe don’t see it as a land invasion, but as land reclaiming. We have a historical-heritage claim to the land.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n