PRETORIA STUDENT LAW
REVIEW
(2019) 13
Pretoria Tydskrif vir Regstudente
Kgatišobaka ya Baithuti ba Molao ya Pretoria
Editor-in-chief:
Primrose Egnetor Ruvarashe Kurasha
Editors:
Thato Petrus Maruapula
Mzwandile Ngidi Frieda Shifotoka
2019
(2019) 13 Pretoria Student Law Review
Published by: Pretoria University Law Press (PULP)
The Pretoria University Law Press (PULP) is a publisher, based in Africa, launched and managed by the Centre for Human Rights and the Faculty of Law, University of Pretoria, South Africa. PULP endeavours to publish and make available innovative, high-quality scholarly texts on law in Africa. PULP also publishes a series of collections of legal documents related to public law in Africa, as well as text books from African countries other than South Africa.
For more information on PULP, see www.pulp.up.ac.za
Printed and bound by:
Minit Print, Hatfield, Pretoria
Cover:
Design by Adebayo Okeowo
To submit articles, contact:
PULP Faculty of Law University of Pretoria South Africa 0002 Tel: +27 12 420 4948 Fax: +27 12 362 5125 [email protected] www.pulp.up.ac.za
ISSN: 1998-0280 © 2019
TABLE OF CONTENTS
- Editors’ note: Legacy
- v
by Primrose Egnetor Ruvarashe Kurasha
- Tribute
- vii
- Note on contributions
- viii
Restoring electricity use with the spoliation remedy:
A critical comment on Eskom Holdings Soc Ltd v Masinda
by Gustav Muller
1
17 27 40
Prescription: The present interpretation of extinctive prescription and the acquisition of real rights
by Celinhlanhla Magubane
To be black and alive: A study of the inherent racism in the tertiary education system in post-1994 South Africa
by Chelsea L. Swanepoel
Through thick and thin: From the regulation of queerness to queer theory as decolonisation
by DJ van Wyk
The easy way out? Constitutional avoidance and its impact on human right enforcement in Botswana
by Kago K.Y. Boiki
58
- 74
- Looking to literature for transformation
by Kayla Thomas
A discussion of intellectual history, jurisprudential theories and feminism in the eradication of epistemic violence in South Africa
by Kiasha Pilla
88
Abstract v substantive-equality — A critical race theory analysis of ‘hate speech’ as considered in the SAHRC-Report on utterances made by Julius Malema 97
by Kyle Grootboom
A critical race feminist reading of the South African
- property law
- 115
by Laetitia Makombe
iii
- Should the flag fit, or must we acquit?
- 130
by Nicholas Herd
The impact of the 4th Industrial Revolution on the employment relationship and adaptive skills
- requirements
- 155
163
by Odirile Sepeng
The role of law and governance in advancing climate resilience and climate justice
by Otitoola Olufolajimi
Case note: Stepping in the right direction towards fully realising the constitutional promise of Section 29(1)(a) of the
- Constitution
- 197
Federation of Governing Bodies for South African
Schools (FEDSAS) v Member of the Executive Council for Education, Gauteng and Another
2016 (4) SA 546 (CC)
by Philile Shandu
The feminist agenda, a fall of hierarchal redress or an attempt to establishing an ‘equal’ society gone wrong: An internal critique to feminist theories
by Simon Motshweni
208 222
Subaltern responses to epistemic violence; the legacy of colonialism
by Siwelile S. Mkhwanazi
iv
EDITORS’ NOTE: LEGACY
by Primrose Egnetor Ruvarashe Kurasha
Honoured to be the first black Editor-in-Chief of the University of Pretoria’s Law Review, an annual publication which is the pride of the best law faculty in Africa (according to the Times Higher Education World University Rankings), I proudly present to you the 2019 edition
of the Pretoria Student Law Review (PSLR).
As I reflect on how the 17 year old me decided to one day become the President of the Law Review of ‘whichever’ tertiary institution I found myself at, after having been inspired by the first black Harvard Law Review President, President Barack Obama, who was appointed as such a year before my birth, I stand amazed at how inspiration and vision are literally a foretaste of a future God would have predestined for one, in this case mine.
With a vision to create a boldly outlined legacy for the PSLR, I spearheaded the setting up of systems that would last the lifespan of the PSLR, with my main focus as Editor-in-chief being on branding and operations. I am proud to announce that as the PSLR we now have our official email address; website; annual calendar; set dates for the publishing of our annual ‘Call for Submissions’ and annual ‘Call for Applications’ for the PSLR Editorial Board; official communication templates used for correspondence with our stakeholders namely, the Reviewers, the authors, the Editors and the public at large; sound disciplinary procedures and a significant social media presence. A consistent teammate in bringing this to fruition was Dr Gustav Muller, in his capacity as the PSLR Guardian.
Building on last year’s legacy, for the first time in its history, the
PSLR used the same cover consecutively in different years, namely 2018 & 2019. It is at this juncture that I would like to acknowledge
v
and thank my predecessor, Mr Jürgen Zwecker, for the legacy he created for the PSLR, specifically in terms of its image and the foundation he laid for its branding. A legacy I have only been too glad to build upon and continue. To our photography genius Adebayo Okeowo, thank you very much for your exceptional cover art. Our conference calls between New York and Pretoria, with an emphasis on the different time zones which we managed remarkably well, yielded fruit.
Having thoroughly read each article and footnote in this edition, dotted every ‘i’ dotted and crossed every ‘t’, I cannot help but marvel at the culture of robust debate, research and relentless fact-finding cementing and holding together the identity of the University of Pretoria’s Law faculty. The sharp legal minds it has moulded, may they forever be emblematic of the excellence, critical thinking and fruits of pluralism, cultural integration and transformation, which not only define the faculty but which will further entrench its spot on the world map. This PSLR edition also brags of articles from sister institutions and other African countries, as has been the case with previous editions.
It would be out of character for me not to acknowledge my exceptional team of Editors who committed to making this a quality publication, backing and forthing with the authors and reviewers. Thank you Thato Maruapula, Mzwandile Ngidi and Frieda Shifotoka! To the reviewers, your adjudication laid the foundation for this year’s PSLR edition and we are grateful to you, especially for doing so gratuitously. To the authors, you have started your publishing career on a remarkable note. To Lizette Hermann and Elzet Hurter, your dedication to the PSLR for over a decade, has us as the Editorial Board and the Law Faculty forever indebted.
To the renowned philosopher and theologian hailing from
Georgetown University and New York University, who introduced me to publishing, my dear father Prof Jemison Kurasha, ndinotenda Mukanya (thank you Dad, father of the clan). To my exceptional mentor and late mother, the first female Pro-Vice Chancellor and Vice Chancellor in Zimbabwe, a world renowned academic and diplomat par excellence, you were wise and diligent enough to build a legacy which has outlived you Prof Primrose Kurasha, all by the grace of God. My dear sister, best friend and Economist of note, Flora M.N. Kurasha, your knees keep me standing.
Dear reader, enjoy the read! Primrose Egnetor Ruvarashe Kurasha Editor-in-Chief 2019
vi
TRIBUTE
This specific PSLR edition is a tribute to the former Dean of the Law Faculty of the University of Pretoria, Prof Andre Boraine.
For promoting the Pretoria Student Law Review (PSLR) so well,
that it has been acknowledged by and nominated for the Yunus Mahomed Public Interest Law award in consecutive years, thank you Prof.
For presiding over our faculty in a manner so sound, that saw it becoming the best law faculty in Africa in 2018, according to the Times Higher Education World University Rankings, you also promoted the PSLR and enhanced its readership. Again, thank you Prof.
For being an exceptional Guardian of the PSLR, ever-supportive and more than willing to offer much needed truth, tough talk and solid guidance, thank you Prof Boraine.
vii
NOTE ON CONTRIBUTIONS
We invite all students to submit material for the eleventh edition of the Pretoria Student Law Review. We accept journal articles, case notes, commentary pieces, response articles or any other written material on legal topics. You may even consider converting your research memos or a dissertation chapter into an article.
Please visit our website at www.pslr.co.za for more information. You may submit your contribution to: [email protected]
Alternatively you may submit your contribution by hand at the office of the Dean of the Law Faculty:
Dean’s Office Faculty of Law 4th Floor Law Building University of Pretoria Pretoria 0002
viii
RESTORING ELECTRICITY USE WITH THE SPOLIATION REMEDY: A CRITICAL COMMENT ON
ESKOM HOLDINGS SOC LTD V MASINDA
by Gustav Muller*
- 1
- Introduction
1
In Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd v Masinda (‘Masinda’) teams from the
appellant removed various illegal connections to the national electricity reticulation grid. The removal was animated by a concern for the well-being of those people living in homes with illegal connections and to prevent damage to their property as a result of
2
these dangerous connections. While the exact reasons for the removal of the illegal connections were not clearly articulated in the appellant’s submissions, it appears that the connections constituted an immediate danger to the public because the equipment were too small; it did not meet the prescribed quality standards; and it was not
3
installed by an authorised contractor. The respondent argued that she used the electricity in her home by drawing supply through a prepaid meter and that this supply constituted an incident of her occupation. She successfully sought the restoration ante omnia of the electricity supply to her home in the Eastern Cape Division of the High
4
Court, Mtatha. On appeal Leach JA reasoned that it could not have
- *
- LLB LLD (Stellenbosch University), Diploma (Åbo Akademi). Senior Lecturer in the
Department of Private Law, University of Pretoria. ORCID: 0000-0003-1254-6601.
1234
2019 (5) SA 386 (SCA).
Masinda par 2. Masinda par 3. Masinda par 9.
1
2
Critical comment on Eskom Holdings Soc LTD v Masinda
been the intention of the court a quo to order the restoration ante omnia of a connection ‘that was unlawful and a danger to the public.’ Restoration ante omnia that ‘complied with the necessary requirements of safety’ would not only have required the appellant to
5
do something more than restoring the property to its former state, but also extended the purpose of the spoliation remedy to include the ‘reconstituted equivalent’ of the specified property. However, if
- 6
- 7
the court a quo intended the restoration ante omnia of an unlawful
8
and dangerous electricity supply, the further difficulty would be that the order would be directing the appellant to ‘commit an illegality’ which itself would be sufficient for a court to refuse the spoliation
9
remedy. Finally, Leach JA reasoned that the mere existence of an electricity reticulation supply in the respondent’s home is insufficient
10
to afford her a right that qualified as an incident of her occupation.
11
He therefore upheld the appeal and dismissed the respondents
12
‘terse’ claim as ‘misplaced’ and ‘insufficient’.
In this article I provide a critical comment on the Masinda judgment. I seek to do so by providing a brief exposition of the importance of having access to and being able to stop unlawful interfere with your access to electricity in part 2. In part 3 I set out the requirements, features and application of the mandament van spolie. This is followed in part 4 with an analysis of the growing jurisprudence (comprising two high court judgments that predate democracy and two judgments from the Supreme Court of Appeal in the past decade) where the mandament van spolie was used to seek restoration ante omnia of electricity use.
- 2
- The importance of electricity from a human
rights perspective
13
In Government of the Republic of South Africa v Grootboom
(Grootboom), Yacoob J provided a nuanced exposition of the obligations that flow from section 26 of the Constitution. In his analysis the right of access to adequate housing entails ‘more than bricks and mortar’. Importantly, this includes access to:
56
See Zinman v Miller 1956 (3) SA 8 (T). T s welopele Non-Profit Organisation v City of T s hwane Metropolitan Municipality 2007 (6) SA 511 (SCA) par 24. See also Ngomane v City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality [2019] 3 All SA 69 (SCA) par 18–20 and Rikhotso v
Northcliff Ceramics 1997 (1) SA 526 (W) at 535B–C.
Masinda par 10.
789
Masinda par 12. Masinda par 13.
10 Masinda par 22. 11 Masinda par 27. 12 Masinda par 24.
13 2001 (1) SA 46 (CC).
(2019) 13 Pretoria Student Law Review
3
available land, appropriate services such as the provision of water and the removal of sewage and the financing of all of these, including the building of the house itself. For a person to have access to adequate housing all of these conditions need to be met: there must be land,
14
there must be services, [and] there must be a dwelling.
Yacoob J’s description of what it means to have access to adequate housing in South Africa — in particular, services like electricity —
15
- resembles
- one of the characteristics that the United Nations
16
- Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
- (‘CESCR’)
identified as being indicative of having access to housing for purposes
17
of article 11(1) of the International Covenant on Economic, Social
18
and Cultural Rights (‘ICESCR’). Housing, according to the CESCR, will be considered adequate if it inter alia provides access to:
certain facilities essential for health, security, comfort and nutrition. All beneficiaries of the right to adequate housing should have sustainable access to natural and common resources, safe drinking water, energy for cooking, heating and lighting, sanitation and washing facilities, means of
19
food storage, refuse disposal, site drainage and emergency services.
Conceptualising access to services — like and electricity — as an integral part of the right of access to adequate housing reinforces Yacoob J’s contextual approach to the interpretation of section 26 of
20
the Constitution. On the one hand, the approach forges explicit
21
textual links with section 32 of the Constitution. In doing so the
14 Grootboom par 35 (emphasis added). 15 Despite the ‘significant’ textual differences that Yacoob J enumerated in
Grootboom par 28.
16 The committee consists of 18 experts with internationally recognised competence in the field of human rights who serve in their personal capacity for a renewable four year term. The primary task of the Committee is to assist the Economic and Social Council with its consideration of the reports that States Parties submit to the Secretary-General of the United Nations (article 16(2) of the ICSECR).
17 Article 11(1) of the ICESCR, which affords everyone the right to an adequate standard of living, reads: ‘The States Parties to the Present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to an adequate standard of living for himself and his family, including adequate food, clothing and housing, and to the continuous improvement of living conditions. The States Parties will take appropriate steps to ensure the realization of this right, recognizing to this effect the essential importance of international cooperation based on free consent.’
18 993 UNTS 3. The Covenant was adopted by the General Assembly of the United
Nations on 16 December 1966 and came into force on 3 January 1976. As at 19 June 2019, the Covenant has been ratified by 169 countries. South Africa signed the Covenant on 3 October 1994 and ratified it on 15 January 2015.
19 CESCR General Comment 4: The right to adequate housing (Art 11(1)), UN Doc E/
C 1992/23 (1991) par 8(b).
20 Grootboom par 21.
21 Section 32(1) of the Constitution affords everyone ‘the right of access to – (a) any information held by the state; and any information that is held by another person and that is required for the exercise or protection of any rights.’ The Promotion of Access to Information Act 2 of 2000 was enacted to give effect to section 32(2) of the Constitution. See, in general, Currie I and De Waal J The Bill of Rights Handbook 6th ed (2013) chapter 30; Klaaren J and Penfold G ‘Access to Information’ in Woolman S, Bishop M and Brickhill J (eds) Constitutional Law of
South Africa 2nd ed, chapter 62.
4
Critical comment on Eskom Holdings Soc LTD v Masinda
conceptualisation affirms the interrelated, interconnected and
22
mutually supporting nature of all the rights in the Bill of Rights. On the other hand, the approach highlights the social and historical
23
context against which the denial of access to electricity (including
24
as a source of energy for cooking) should be interpreted.
The Constitution states that it is one of the objects of local
25
government to ensure the provision of basic services to communities
26
in an equitable and sustainable manner. The power to realise these basic services have been assigned to local governments in terms of two important statutes: the Housing Act 107 of 1997 and the Local
- 27
- 28
22 See, in general, Liebenberg S Socio-economics rights: Adjudication under a
transformative constitution (2010) 51–54 and the sources cited there.
23 White Paper par 3.1.4(c) estimated that 46.5% of all households did not have a link to the electricity supply grid in 1994. The latest statistics from Statistics South Africa indicate that the percentage of households in South Africa that are connected to the mains electricity supply increased by 7,7% (or 5.086 million households) from 76,7% (or 8.586 million households) in 2002 to 84,4% (or 13.672 million households) in 2017. See Statistics South Africa Statistical Release P0318,
General Household Survey 2017 (2019) 32.