Shimza's ‘Hang Awt' in Thembisa puts the vibes on hold due to protests as he rocks Europe
DJ Shimza's eatery The Hang Awt 1632 temporarily closed its doors following protests in Thembisa. Picture: shimza.dj/Instagram
DJ Shimza's eatery, The Hang Awt 1632 in Thembisa, closed its doors on Monday in respect of the community protests that had gripped the Ekurhuleni township.
'Based on the recent events happening in and around Thembisa, we have decided to put the vibes on hold for now,' read the brief statement.
'We sincerely apologise for any inconvenience caused by this closure and will continue to assess the situation. We are committed to reopening as soon as it is safe to do so. Updates will be communicated via our official social media platforms.'
Thembisa community members took to the streets on Sunday night and Monday to protest against the electricity tariff implemented by the City of Ekurhuleni, as new electricity charges came into effect on 1 July for the 2025-26 financial year.
Residents expressed concern over fixed monthly fees of just under R109 for single-phase connections and more than R200 for three-phase connections.
The new charges follow a 12.74% national electricity tariff increase approved by the National Energy Regulator of South Africa (Nersa), effective from April 1, 2025.
The Hang Awt 1632 is expected to open for business after the suspension of the protests.
ALSO READ: Ekurhuleni mayor to suspend electricity tariff hike after protests in Thembisa
Thembisa community wins
However, following the heated protests, City of Ekurhuleni mayor Nkosindiphile Xhakaza suspended the new fixed electricity tariff charge until further notice.
Addressing residents outside Rabasotho Community Hall, Xhakaza expressed relief that the protests had not resulted in any reported injuries.
'It has been painful since this morning and last night when you decided to take to the streets. We must agree that some people have no interest in coming up with solutions,' he said.
ALSO READ: DJ Shimza's restaurant The Hang Awt set to reopen its doors
Shimza in Europe
Real name Ashley Raphala, Shimza is currently on a two-month-long European and North African tour that has already seen him play DJ sets.
The tour started in early July, where he performed in Egypt , followed by sets in Spain, Morocco and France. When the protests kicked off on Sunday night in his beloved Thembisa, Shimza was performing at Ibiza's Playa Soleil.
He'll be performing in Greece and Italy in the coming days. His tour is expected to wrap up in early September.
NOW READ: 'You aspire to tenders' – Mmusi Maimane drags DJ Shimza and Athi Geleba
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Maverick
7 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
Eskom's court challenge to electricity trading licences is a dangerous reactionary strike against reform
Eskom's court application opposing the National Energy Regulator of South Africa's decision to issue five new electricity trading licences is not only regressive – it is dangerously disingenuous. In a filing to the Gauteng Division of the High Court on 24 July 2025, Eskom alleges that the National Energy Regulator of South Africa's (Nersa) decision represents a radical and unconsulted 'new policy' threatening to 'upend the entire landscape of electricity provision' in South Africa. This accusation reeks of institutional amnesia, denialism and resistance to long-standing reform commitments that Eskom itself has acknowledged for decades. Let us be clear: the liberalisation of South Africa's electricity sector is not new. The notion of third-party electricity trading, open access to the grid and competitive supply was explicitly articulated as early as 1998 in the White Paper on the Energy Policy of the Republic of South Africa. The emergence of electricity traders is not a deviation – it is the fulfilment of a long-standing policy commitment. Eskom knows this. That seminal document – endorsed by the government and cited countless times by Eskom itself – called for the unbundling of Eskom and the creation of a competitive electricity supply industry to improve efficiency and ensure energy security. In the white paper the government unequivocally stated: 'The electricity sector will be gradually opened to greater competition, and the current single-buyer model will be reformed.' This included plans for retail competition and multiple electricity suppliers. Fast-forward to 2019, and the Department of Public Enterprises' Roadmap for Eskom in a Reformed Electricity Supply Industry reaffirmed this vision. It clearly mapped out the unbundling of Eskom into three independent businesses – generation, transmission and distribution – and explicitly supported the facilitation of competition in generation and supply. The Eskom roadmap stated: 'To enable fair and non-discriminatory access to the grid, electricity traders will be allowed access to customers, and mechanisms will be put in place to ensure equitable pricing.' In other words, the emergence of electricity traders is not a deviation – it is the fulfilment of a long-standing policy commitment. Eskom knows this. And yet, in a desperate attempt to cling to its monopoly, Eskom's court papers now argue that these licences represent 'a unilateral policy shift' that 'has not been the subject of public consultation'. That claim is not only false – it is egregiously dishonest. The five trading licences that Eskom now seeks to nullify were granted by Nersa after following due process, including public participation by Eskom itself, as mandated under both the Electricity Regulation Act of 2006 and the Electricity Regulation Amendment Act that came into effect on 1 January 2025. Eskom also had the opportunity to comment on the Acts themselves during the industry consultation process and parliamentary promulgation processes, and no doubt did so. By waiting until after the licences were granted to launch a legal challenge, reeks of strategic delay and corporate obstructionism. Retail competition is not 'poaching' – it is how liberalised and competitive energy markets function. Worse still is Eskom's inflammatory language. The utility claims that traders are now allowed to 'poach the best of Eskom's customers' without bearing any of the 'redistributive responsibilities' enabled by Eskom's current tariff structures. This argument is deliberately misleading. Eskom Distribution holds two distinct licences: a distribution licence, which grants it exclusive rights over the wires business in its service areas, and a trading licence, which is non-exclusive and places Eskom in direct competition with other energy retailers. The tariffs charged for network access are regulated and paid by the customer, regardless of who supplies the electricity. In other words, Eskom continues to recover its costs for maintaining infrastructure even when it loses customers to another licensed electrical energy trader. This is a thinly veiled attempt to weaponise social justice rhetoric in defence of institutional self-interest. To conflate distribution revenues with energy trading revenues – as Eskom does – is a sleight of hand aimed at preserving an outdated monopoly. Retail competition is not 'poaching' – it is how liberalised and competitive energy markets function. Eskom is free to compete for customers based on service quality, price and energy attributes such as green credentials. If Eskom cannot compete on those terms, that is a reflection on its product offering – not on the rules of the game. Even more farcical is Eskom's suggestion that allowing competition will cause prejudice to 'users of electricity generally, the many poor people reliant on subsidisation… and to the taxpayer.' This is a thinly veiled attempt to weaponise social justice rhetoric in defence of institutional self-interest. Eskom's bloated operating model, high losses and culture of inefficiency are the primary threats to affordability – not the emergence of competitors who can deliver electricity more efficiently or more sustainably. Let us also not forget: the Electricity Regulation Amendment Act, which came into force on 1 January 2025, was the result of years of public engagement and parliamentary debate. It entrenches the legal foundation for competitive electricity markets and affirms the legal standing of electricity traders. Eskom did not oppose this Act or its predecessor. It cannot now claim surprise. Furthermore, PowerX – South Africa's first licensed trader – was granted its licence as early as 2009, 16 years before this court application. The licensing of several other traders has followed. Eskom never challenged these licences. To now cry foul – after traders have operated for more than a decade and with policy clearly evolving towards competition – is both disingenuous and opportunistic. Instead of adapting to the market evolution it helped script, Eskom is now deploying legal tactics to delay the inevitable. Eskom's challenge also betrays a deep contradiction at the heart of its rhetoric. On one hand, it laments the risk to its revenue and its ability to cross-subsidise poor households. On the other, it has consistently failed to deliver on its service obligations to those very households – many of whom face load reduction, unaffordable tariffs or outright disconnection. What Eskom fears is not harm to the poor – it is the erosion of its customer base by more agile, customer-centric alternatives. The true risk to Eskom's business model is not Nersa's licensing of traders. It is Eskom's failure to reform itself in line with the policy it helped shape. This case reveals Eskom for what it is: a state-owned behemoth engaged in regulatory brinkmanship to preserve its dominance, even as the sector moves on. Instead of adapting to the market evolution it helped script, Eskom is now deploying legal tactics to delay the inevitable: a competitive, diversified electricity supply industry where customers have choice and innovation can flourish. If the court entertains Eskom's arguments, the result will be profound uncertainty for all prospective market entrants. It will deter investment, undermine regulatory credibility and signal that vested interests can override both law and policy. But if Eskom's challenge is dismissed – as it should be – it will reinforce the integrity of South Africa's electricity reform process and signal that the country is serious about enabling a modern, competitive energy sector. In conclusion, Eskom's court challenge is not merely a legal objection – it is a full-frontal assault on reform. It misrepresents the law, distorts policy history and manipulates socioeconomic concerns to shield its own inefficiencies. The courts – and the public – must see this for what it is: a desperate attempt to turn back the clock on two decades of progress. DM
Eyewitness News
9 hours ago
- Eyewitness News
France defends move to recognise Palestinian state
PARIS - France defended its decision to recognise Palestinian statehood amid domestic and international criticism on Friday, including against the charge that the move plays into the hands of militant group Hamas. President Emmanuel Macron said Thursday that his country would formally recognise a Palestinian state during a UN meeting in September, the most powerful European nation to announce such a move. Macron's announcement drew condemnation from Israel, which said it "rewards terror", while US Secretary of State Marco Rubio called it "reckless" and said it "only serves Hamas propaganda". Mike Huckabee, US ambassador to Israel, quipped that Macron did not say where a future Palestinian state would be located. "I can now exclusively disclose that France will offer the French Riviera & the new nation will be called "Franc-en-Stine", he said on X. Hamas itself - which is designated a terrorist group by the United States and the European Union - praised the French initiative, saying it was "a positive step in the right direction toward doing justice to our oppressed Palestinian people". But French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot on Friday argued that Macron's initiative went against what the militant group wanted. "Hamas has always ruled out a two-state solution. By recognising Palestine, France goes against that terrorist organisation," Barrot said on X. With its decision, France was "backing the side of peace against the side of war", Barrot added. Domestic reactions ranged from praise on the left, condemnation on the right and awkward silence in the ranks of the government itself. 'COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE', 'POINTLESS' The leader of the far-right National Rally (RN), Jordan Bardella, said the announcement was "rushed" and afforded Hamas "unexpected institutional and international legitimacy". On the other side of the political spectrum, Jean-Luc Melenchon, boss of the far-left France Unbowed party, called Macron's announcement "a moral victory", although he deplored that it did not take effect immediately. Interior Minister Bruno Retailleau, a right-winger whose relationship with Macron is tense, declined on Friday to give his opinion, saying he was currently busy with an unrelated "serious topic" linked to the "security of French people on holiday". But the vice president of his party, Les Republicains, Xavier Bellamy, blasted the decision as possibly "counter-productive" or, at best, "pointless". The move risked "endangering Israeli civilians" as well as "Palestinian civilians who are victims of Hamas's barbarism", he said. Bellamy said that Macron's move was a departure from the president's previously set conditions for recognition of Palestine, which included a Hamas demilitarisation, the movement's exclusion from any future government, the liberation of all Israeli hostages in Gaza and the recognition of Israel by several Arab states. "None of them have been met," he said. While France would be the most significant European country to recognise a Palestinian state, others have hinted they could do the same. Britain's Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced he would hold a call on Friday with counterparts in Germany and France on efforts to stop the fighting, adding that a ceasefire would "put us on a path to the recognition of a Palestinian state". Norway, Spain, Ireland and Slovenia all announced recognition following the outbreak of the Gaza conflict, along with several other non-European countries. Once France follows through on its announcement, a total of at least 142 countries will have recognised Palestinian statehood.
eNCA
16 hours ago
- eNCA
AI Ray-Ban Meta glasses help EssilorLuxottica boost sales
ROME - EssilorLuxottica, the world's top maker of eyeglasses, said a tripling of sales of Ray-Ban Meta AI connected glasses helped drive increase in profits. The group's revenue climbed by 5.5 percent to 14 billion euros ($16.2 billion) in the first half of the year, with net profit edging 1.6 percent higher to 1.4 billion euros. EssilorLuxottica's chief executive Francesco Milleri said results showed the group is "keeping pace with our growth targets despite a volatile environment". Like other European companies, the weak dollar impacted the company's performance in the North American region, nearly wiping out growth in the second quarter. EssilorLuxottica said AI glasses gained momentum in the first half of the year, with Ray-Ban Meta more than tripling in revenue year-over-year. It also announced new AI-enabled Oakley glasses in June. "We are leading the transformation of glasses as the next computing platform, one where AI, sensory tech and a data-rich healthcare infrastructure will converge to empower humans and unlock our full potential," said Milleri. The Ray-Ban glasses, equipped with camera, headphones and microphones, allow wearers to prompt Meta's AI without opening their phone by saying "Hey Meta". The company did not provide sales figures for the glasses or comment on the minority stake Meta has taken in it, which was disclosed earlier this month by Bloomberg. The company is a leading manufacturer of corrective lenses as well as frames, having acquired the rights to manufacture eyewear for numerous luxury brands including Giorgio Armani, Burberry, Chanel, Dolce&Gabbana, Prada and Versace.
