Alexandra residents still waiting for title deeds
The development includes three types of units: stand-alone houses, flats, and rental units. While title deeds have been prepared for those living in stand-alone houses and flats, residents in rental units remain in limbo. The confusion stems from how the City of Johannesburg handled the original housing allocations 15 years ago.
According to activist and long-time resident Judith Madiakgotla, the initial plan was for beneficiaries living in flats to also own the adjacent rental units. However, during the rushed development ahead of the 2010 World Cup, the city allocated people to both flats and rental units without clarifying that occupants in rental units are tenants, not rightful owners of the units. 'There was a situation where councillors brought in their own lists of people they called 'special cases'. That's where the mix-up started. Some were [flat owners], and others were allocated rental units.'
Also read: FEATURE: Is the Johannesburg Property Company the worst performing city entity?
She stated that it was only after residents had moved in, did the city clarify that those in flats were the rightful owners of both the flat and the rental unit next to it.
She said residents have taken their complaints to the Rental Housing Tribunal, the Public Protector, and the Human Rights Commission. While title deeds are reportedly ready for those in stand-alone units, as well as those in flats, Madiakgotla said they aren't there for those in the rental units. 'The dispute is simmering. We want title deeds for everyone that was allocated in 2010 by the City of Johannesburg, and is on the database.'
Democratic Alliance Gauteng Shadow MEC for Human Settlement Mervyn Cirota recently visited the area and acknowledged the problem. Cirota said the issue affects up to 6 000 households. 'We need to get the city and the province involved in this. There needs to be a forensic audit and we need to go back to 2010 to determine exactly what the roll out [process] was. Who is entitled to ownership and what the distinction is between the ownership of the so-called [flats and stand-alone] units and the rental units, because there is some confusion about that.'
Alex News reached out to the Department of Human Settlements for comment. Further updates will be provided once they become available.
Follow us on our Whatsapp channel, Facebook, X, Instagram, and TikTok for the latest updates and inspiration!
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
IOL News
13 hours ago
- IOL News
Trump shows support for Sydney Sweeney despite social media backlash over advert
Sydney Sweeney faces backlash for her recent denim campaign, as netizens disagree with the choice of visuals that the brand chose. Image: Instagram Donald Trump has hailed Sydney Sweeney's American Eagle advertising campaign. The US President has lavished praise on the Euphoria actress, who has been identified as a registered Republican in Florida, for featuring in the "hottest" commercial for the brand's jeans, despite it being criticized on social media and sparking a debate about beauty standards. Trump wrote on Truth Social: "Sydney Sweeney, a registered Republican, has the 'hottest' ad out there. It's for American Eagle, and the jeans are 'flying off the shelves'. Go get 'em Sydney!" Donald Trump is showing support for the ad which has received backlash on social media Image: Facebook Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ The White House chief compared the advertisement to Jaguar's ill-fated rebrand last year, which he branded as a "seriously woke advertisement" and a "total disaster." Trump, 79, also used his post to take aim at pop star Taylor Swift - whom he clashed with previously after she endorsed his rival Kamala Harris in last year's presidential election - as he described her as a "woke singer". He said: "Ever since I alerted the world as to when she was by saying on TRUTH that I can't stand her (HATE!). She was booed out of the Super Bowl and became NO LONGER HOT. The tide has seriously turned - Being WOKE is for losers, being Republican is what you want to be. Thank you for your attention to this matter!" A public database in Florida shows that Sweeney, 27, was registered as a Republican voter in the state last June - with the matter being discovered by a YouTuber who came across it as she put together a profile of The White Lotus star. American Eagle defended the actress last week after the campaign's tagline 'Sydney Sweeney has great jeans' was criticised because the phrase "great genes" is associated with eugenicists - who argue that humanity can be improved genetically through selective breeding. The company wrote in an Instagram post: "'Sydney Sweeney Has Great Jeans' is and always was about the jeans. Her jeans. Her story."We'll continue to celebrate how everyone wears their AE jeans with confidence, their way. Great jeans look good on everyone. "Sydney revealed that she was "freaking out" when she was approached to star in the campaign. She said: "I was freaking out because I was like, 'This is perfect', and I was so they were like, 'We want it to be a denim campaign', I was through the roof. I was like, 'This is it. This is Syd. I will be able to bring this to life. You have no idea.'" Bang Showbiz
The South African
13 hours ago
- The South African
BIG changes coming to SA's borders this month
New passport stamps, introduced at SA's borders from this month (August 2025), will hopefully stem the tide of corruption and illegal immigration. This past weekend, the Border Management Authority (BMA) hosted a press conference in Pretoria to clarify. Besides releasing its quarterly report for the 2025/26 financial year, the BMA Commissioner, Michael Masiapato, highlighted key changes at SA's borders. A new collaboration with the Government Printing Works brings with it a new passport stamp of the 'highest security standards.' Here's what it means to you … Example of a South African entry stamp on a British passport. Image: File Principally, the BMA is introducing a new stamp at SA's borders to prevent tampering, forgery, and unauthorised use. Withdrawal of the old stamps was carried out concurrently with the distribution of the new one, reports IOL . 'We started with immigration-based stamps for SA's borders. But now we'll embark on redesigning new stamps for other specialised functions. These include the likes of agriculture, health and environment,' said Masiapato. Most foreign nationals forbade entry were from Zimbabwe and Mozambique, says the commissioner. Image: File Likewise, Masiapato provided an update on the security of SA's borders. In the first quarter of the year, 9 954 persons were intercepted and deported while attempting to enter the country illegally. 'Of those, 5 826 were undocumented, 2 127 inadmissible and 2 001 undesirable. Moreover, the majority were from Basotho, Zimbabwe and Mozambique,' said Masiapato. Since July 2022, the BMA has prevented 496 622 people from crossing SA's borders illegally. And over this period the border guards have intercepted more than 350 vehicles being smuggled out of the country by criminal syndicates. Plus, guards have seized millions of Rands' worth of counterfeit clothing and footwear. Let us know by leaving a comment below, or send a WhatsApp to 060 011 021 1. Subscribe to The South African website's newsletters and follow us on WhatsApp, Facebook, X and Bluesky for the latest news.
Daily Maverick
a day ago
- Daily Maverick
The price of going viral – when political activism becomes very expensive
In an age where a single WhatsApp message can mobilise protesters and a Facebook post can shape public opinion about workplace disputes, the traditional boundaries between political activism and trade union representation are blurring in ways that would have been unimaginable a generation ago. The recent labour court judgment in Boomerang Fruits (Pty) Ltd v Umkhonto weSizwe and Others offers a stark reminder that these boundaries exist for good reasons and that crossing them can have serious legal consequences – particularly when amplified through digital platforms that can transform minor workplace grievances into viral political campaigns. From payroll error to digital political theatre The case began with a seemingly mundane payroll error. Agricultural workers at a fruit farm in Elgin in the Western Cape were underpaid overtime wages ranging from R120 to R176 per person – hardly the stuff of revolutionary politics. Yet within days, this minor administrative mistake had escalated into a full-blown industrial dispute involving police escorts, highway blockades, criminal charges and a sophisticated digital media campaign that branded the employer across multiple online platforms as racist and colonial. The transformation was breathtakingly swift. What might once have taken weeks of careful union organisation now unfolded in real time across social media networks. The Umkhonto weSizwe party (MK) didn't simply insert itself into the dispute – it digitally amplified it, using Facebook posts, press releases and WhatsApp groups to craft a narrative that reached far beyond the farm gates of the Western Cape. The digital disruption of industrial relations The involvement of the MK party demonstrates how political parties have learned to exploit the digital revolution in ways that fundamentally challenge traditional industrial relations. When employees contacted the party for assistance, the MK party didn't simply offer advice or direct workers to appropriate legal channels. Instead, it created a parallel digital infrastructure that bypassed established negotiation mechanisms entirely. The party's WhatsApp communications coordinated meetings with management, its Facebook posts generated public sympathy for workers, and its press releases shaped media coverage – all while maintaining the pretence of merely providing 'advisory' support. This digital orchestration allowed the MK party to function as a shadow trade union while avoiding the legal responsibilities that formal representation would entail. Judge Robert Lagrange's judgment methodically dissected this digital strategy, concluding that the MK party had 'consistently assumed the role of the representative of the strikers' while simultaneously 'launching a media attack on Boomerang, portraying it in villainous terms'. The court recognised that in the digital age, representation isn't just about formal negotiations – it's about controlling the narrative that shapes public perception and influences the balance of power. The legal principle at stake is both simple and profound, but its application has become infinitely more complex in the digital era. South Africa's industrial relations system was designed for an analogue world where disputes unfolded in board rooms and on factory floors, not on social media platforms where every statement can be screenshot, shared and weaponised. The social media amplification effect The court's analysis of the MK party's digital campaign reveals how social media has fundamentally altered the dynamics of labour disputes. Traditional negotiation assumes a degree of privacy that allows parties to make concessions without losing face publicly. Digital platforms destroy this privacy, creating performative pressures that make compromise virtually impossible. The MK party's Facebook posts describing the company as a 'colonial nest' and 'active site of colonial exploitation' weren't just political rhetoric – they were strategic digital content designed to generate shares, comments and viral engagement. The party understood that in the attention economy, inflammatory language performs better than nuanced analysis. The result was a digital firestorm that bore little resemblance to the original overtime payment dispute. WhatsApp democracy and workplace organising Perhaps most significantly, the case highlights how WhatsApp has become a significant organising tool for both legitimate trade union activity and political interference. The MK party's use of WhatsApp groups to coordinate with workers, arrange meetings and distribute talking points created an informal, but highly effective communication network that traditional employers and unions struggle to understand or counter. This 'WhatsApp democracy' operates outside formal industrial relations structures, creating new possibilities for worker organisation, but also new vulnerabilities to political manipulation. The platform's end-to-end encryption makes it nearly impossible for employers to understand how disputes are being coordinated, while its group messaging functionality allows political parties to influence large numbers of workers simultaneously. The judgment also reveals how digital platforms have created expectations of real-time transparency that clash with the traditionally private nature of labour negotiations. The MK party's social media strategy assumed that followers expected constant updates, behind-the-scenes content and immediate responses to developments. This digital transparency imperative makes the patient, confidential work of genuine dispute resolution nearly impossible. When every negotiation session can be livestreamed, every concession can be immediately scrutinised by online audiences, and every statement can be taken out of context and shared widely, the incentives shift dramatically towards performative confrontation rather than problem-solving. Political parties, with their natural understanding of digital engagement, are far better positioned to exploit these dynamics than traditional trade unions or employers. Digital accountability and legal consequences Judge Lagrange's decision to confirm the interdict against the MK party represents one of the first serious judicial attempts to grapple with how digital platforms are reshaping labour relations. The court recognised that social media posts and WhatsApp messages aren't just commentary – they constitute active participation in labour disputes with real legal consequences. The costs order against the MK party is particularly significant in the digital context. By requiring the party to pay the employer's legal costs, the court has established that viral social media campaigns carry financial risks. This digital accountability principle could fundamentally alter how political parties approach online labour activism. The broader implications extend far beyond this single case. Digital platforms don't just amplify existing power dynamics – they create entirely new ones. Political parties that master social media engagement can mobilise workers more effectively than traditional trade unions, but they lack the institutional knowledge and legal obligations that make genuine representation possible. The result is what might be called 'algorithm activism' – political engagement optimised for digital metrics rather than real-world outcomes. The MK party's campaign generated thousands of shares and comments, but it ultimately prolonged the dispute and harmed the workers it claimed to represent. The digital medium had become the message, drowning out the substance of legitimate workplace grievances. Towards digital industrial relations As South Africa grapples with persistent inequality and workplace exploitation, the intersection of digital technology and labour relations will only become more complex. The Boomerang Fruits case provides a crucial precedent for how courts might approach political parties that use social media to blur the lines between advocacy and representation. The challenge ahead is developing industrial relations frameworks that can harness the democratising potential of digital platforms while preventing their exploitation by political opportunists. This will require new forms of digital literacy among trade unionists, employers and judges, as well as clearer legal guidelines about what constitutes impermissible political interference in the social media age. The labour court's firm stance in this case demonstrates that legal principles can adapt to technological change, but only if we remain vigilant about protecting the institutional boundaries that make effective labour relations possible.
