Johannesburg's housing crisis is like a movie on loop
I decided to rewatch the movie Gangster's Paradise: Jerusalema. Besides being an excellent film directed by Ralph Ziman, I started examining the fictional protagonist Lucky Kunene.
He is a symbol of struggle and represents individuals who were involved with the hijacking of buildings in Jozi's suburb of Hillbrow during the 1990s. The character Lucky is not a real person, but the movie is based on real-life events, and it got me thinking.
How much has changed since then?
Well, basically nothing. In fact, I think the situation has worsened. I was in the Johannesburg city centre the other day, and the decay is nothing short of a tragedy. Looking across the once-iconic skyline that was home to some of the tallest buildings in Africa, it's hard to digest what has happened to the City of Gold.
At about the time of Lucky's rhetorical escapade in 1990, Ponte City was hijacked. Then, in 2021, they officially declared the building to be Africa's first-ever vertical slum.
Riddled with lawlessness and gangsterism, it was home to 8000 people, which is way past the legal occupancy rate for this building. Water and electricity were cut off from the building, and people threw so much trash into the centre of the building that it built up 14 storeys high. In later years, when the trash was finally cleaned up, they found 23 bodies.
That's a pretty big fall from grace considering Ponte was once the tallest building in Africa for 48 years straight, measuring 172m in height. It was beaten by a skyscraper in Egypt — only 5m taller.
Someone suggested that Ponte City be converted into the world's first vertical prison. From a design perspective, this might not have been a bad idea for the building itself. But, from a surroundings perspective, a building with such a prominent location surrounded by corporations, bank headquarters and schools was probably not a good match.
I took a tour of Ponte City and according to the tour guide, who lives in Ponte, there are seven hijacked buildings and nine abandoned buildings in the suburb of Berea, where Ponte City is located.
According to reports over the years, 643 buildings have been hijacked in Johannesburg, specifically in the Hillbrow, Yeoville, Berea and Joubert Park areas. More recent estimates have stated that this number has grown to more than 1100 buildings.
When a building is hijacked, it means that the building has been occupied without permission. The owners of the building, or its managing agents, no longer have control over the property. How does this happen? The owners of the buildings cannot be traced. They die, move overseas, or no longer pay the costs of maintaining their assets.
Water and electricity are often cut off by the city, and there are zero sewerage services. These buildings then become unsanitary and dangerous places to live.
All the while, criminals force the tenants to pay rent to them and not to the owners of the building.
The hijacking of buildings is a symptom of seriously deep-seated social problems in our society.
The government's way of dealing with the hijacked-building crisis reminds me of my favourite South African term 'now now' — which could mean they will start dealing with the issue in the next five minutes, five months or five years. The range is what you dream of with no concrete solutions in place or a timeline to make those dreams a reality. And so the solution to the abandoned building problem remains precisely that, a dream without a plan of action.
Many of these buildings are owned by the government. How can our own government no implement its policies and reclaim what is rightfully theirs? Ironically, they love to pass policies, but what about when it comes to implementing them?
People are dying in these buildings, and the solution is in limbo.
Remember the story about the five-storey building at 80 Albert Street, Marshalltown in Johannesburg city centre that caught on fire on 31 August 2023?
The building was constructed in 1954 during apartheid and served as the main administration office for Johannesburg's non-European affairs department. People of colour would essentially collect their 'dompas' here. Later on, it transformed into the Usindiso Women's Shelter until its
By 2019, more than 400 individuals occupied this property. The emergency exits were all locked or blocked at the time of the fire, in which 77 people died and 88 were injured.
More recently, I have read that our current Johannesburg mayor, Dada Morero, plans to relocate his office from Braamfontein to this building. Renovations of the building are expected to be completed this year.
If our government cannot uphold standard occupancy levels and fire regulations in their buildings, how can we expect other landlords to follow suit?
Herman Mashaba, one of the um-teenth mayors of Johannesburg over the past decade, floated around some good suggestions once upon a time. He proposed the conversion of dozens of hijacked buildings, abandoned and government-owned buildings into social housing projects. He brought to the table ideas for incentives such as providing investors with rates and tax exemptions for the period of one year if they could include an affordable housing component in their development. This was not necessarily a bad start as far as solutions go. However, I don't recall any of the above happening during or after Mashaba's tenure.
When Mashaba left his mayoral position in 2019, the City of Johannesburg passed an Inclusionary Housing Policy at the same time to encourage private companies to build social housing in the Johannesburg city centre. More specifically, it provides incentives for buildings with 20 units or more to allocate 30% of their units for low-income housing. Many agreed with the principle, while others were strong critics of the plan's practicality.
The sad truth is that when we fast-forward to 2025, I don't know of many projects that have actually implemented the Inclusionary Housing Policy to obtain its incentives. Sure, there have been approvals of a couple thousand inclusionary housing units since the policy's implementation; however, not many that I know of have been constructed. It seems the policy was not so attractive for developers after all.
And so here we are, it's 2025, and not much has changed. We're still having the same conversations. Still walking past the same burnt-out and hijacked buildings. Still holding the same memorials for lives lost in preventable tragedies. Still hearing the same political promises that come wrapped in red tape and delay.
What's most maddening is that the solution is right in front of us, and has been for years. We have the buildings. Hundreds of them. Some of the most well-located buildings in the country, in a city built on gold and ambition. But instead of being used as catalysts for urban rejuvenation, social housing, and economic upliftment, they sit empty, hijacked, or decaying, becoming ticking time bombs.
Not to mention that building costs are through the roof (excuse the pun). Rebuilding any of these buildings today would run into the billions. Sometimes conversions can be a cost-saving exercise in themselves.
Johannesburg's current mayor, Dada Morero, has recently discussed the city's plans to intensify efforts to reclaim the city centre and address issues related to crime and deteriorating infrastructure. I have also read that Morero plans to relocate his office from Braamfontein to 80 Albert Street. Renovations of the building, which were initiated after the fire, are expected to be completed this year.
Late last year, Morero announced that these problems would be addressed precinct by precinct.
Morero says fewer than 50 hijacked buildings in the city belong to the government. He also mentions that the city cannot find the owners of about 100 hijacked buildings. He suggests that possible expropriation without compensation could be a solution here.
In my opinion, if you can't manage your own buildings successfully, what is the point of taking ownership of others?
It should not take another fire, another news headline, or another round of blame-shifting for us to act. And yet, here we are, stuck in this loop of policy without implementation, vision without backbone, crisis without urgency.
If the government is serious about solving the housing crisis, then we need more than policies that look good on paper. We need plans to be executed. We need a multi-pronged approach: removing the criminals demanding rent from tenants, support for tenants in hijacked buildings, repairing the sewage, water and electricity, and putting in place refuse removal.
Public-private partnerships can rehabilitate abandoned stock, and real incentives for developers who want to build or convert properties for mixed-income housing could be provided.
And let's be clear, this isn't only a housing issue. It's a safety issue. A dignity issue. An economic issue. A human rights issue.
Until we stop viewing hijacked buildings as isolated cases and start addressing them as part of a broader urban failure, nothing will shift. We'll keep rewatching Jerusalema and asking, 'How much has changed since then?'
The answer must not be: nothing.
Because people aren't just looking for affordable housing. They're looking for proof that someone, somewhere, still gives a damn.
Ask Ash examines South Africa's property, architecture and living spaces. Continue the conversation with her on email (
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mail & Guardian
2 hours ago
- Mail & Guardian
Open letter to Paula Slier
Paula Slier. (Wikipedia) Dear Ms Paula Slier, I have observed with a degree of bemusement your recent forays into the blogosphere of the Times of Israel. Having followed your international career, and even encountered your work on the local airwaves of Chai FM here in Johannesburg, I must confess to a certain level of disappointment at the spectacle that has unfolded. On 11 July 2025, you saw fit to amplify the extreme, dangerous and unsubstantiated assertions of one Justin Lewis. A mere two days later, you claim that this is 'a lobbying and advocacy effort based on unverified allegations'. But, instead of apologising to your readers for violating the most basic tenets of ethical journalism and taking steps to mitigate the damage you have caused, you chose once again to amplify these reckless allegations, vowing to pursue them, notwithstanding the lack of evidence. For the record, to say that these claims are unverified and baseless is a perfectly rational response to someone, like Mr Lewis, who clearly has a penchant for misinformation and lies. What is not rational is to ignore a growing body of evidence and information from experts in search of nonexistent evidence that South Africa could not have possibly conceived on its own the interpretation of upholding international law by invoking the provisions of the genocide convention. Just by way of desktop research you would have found this LinkedIn Post , which also has similar sensational claims about the first minister of Scotland. The 'information' you are referring to is an email to the an organisation referred to as the Media Research Council (MRC) in which, Mr Lewis commenced his missive with a litany of the following pronouncements: 'As a 'non-lawyer (I am a farmer by profession, entrepreneur by trade, and consultant to African health development projects in East Africa).' 'Some years ago Lloyds London and I were victims of court sanctioned insurance fraud in SA courts. During which time I worked with Chief Justice Chaskalson to Mogoeng Mogoeng. And the Leveson Inquiry, given the use of phone hacking to corrupt courts, which made Prince Harry's victory special.' 'I am a COE congregant who was privileged to consider the late Archbishop Desmond Tutu as a family friend, given our families long history with the Church.'' He then proceeded to tell the MRC: 'Evidence exists confirming that the SA government, led at that time by its main political party the African National Congress (ANC) knew about Hamas's sic) intended attack on the state of Israel before it happened in [sic] October 2023 and that elements within the SA government, the Department of Foreign Affairs (Dirco) (sic), actively encouraged and enjoined [sic] its support of Hamas political strategy by acting as its agent for access to the ICC and the ICJ, which access to the court (ICJ), Hamas did not have as a non-signatory, as alleged. 'As part of a political strategy, preparations were made prior to the 7 October atrocity against Israel, to put in place mechanisms to approach the ICC and ICJ for protection from the state of Israel's anticipated response. As a layman the example I use is that of assisting a neighbour to burn his house down, then rushing to court to claim insurance protection from your insurer (as your neighbour is a non-signatory).' One might reasonably be surprised that a mere email from a third party, clearly well-versed in the art of name-dropping luminaries — some, like Archbishop Desmond Tutu and former Chief Justice Arthur Chaskalson, no longer with us, alongside the rather incongruous mention of British royalty and former Chief Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng — could trigger a media inquiry. My own rudimentary desktop research swiftly illuminated the gaping holes in Mr Lewis' narrative and credibility: The Leveson Inquiry was an event of seismic proportions, meticulously documented and still debated in the UK. Yet, Mr Lewis' supposed involvement remains conspicuously absent from any credible record. Mr Lewis styles himself a 'non-lawyer' yet claims to have 'worked with two chief justices' of our Republic. In what capacity? South African judges, by the very nature of our judicial system, do not conduct investigations, let alone work with members of the public directly on legal matters. His reference to a Lloyds of London case in our courts, supposedly 'precedent-setting', eludes all recollection, despite its globally recognised status. Furthermore, 'court sanctioned insurance fraud' is oxymoronic: one cannot be the victim of a 'court sanctioned' crime, if the court dismissed the claim it determined it was not a crime. In 2014: 'Lewis says Casisa is a private sector human rights lobby made up of victims of fraud committed upon the court. It has not yet been registered as a human rights organisation in the European Union.' But he made submissions to parliament claiming to be an NGO. In 2017: he stated, 'My name is Justin Lewis and I am a human rights lobbyist for a NGO in the process of being registered whose purpose is the defence of SA national institutions from corruption.' My response to the Independent Online was that it was regrettable they (Independent Online) would lend credence to such unsubstantiated, baseless and reckless claims from an unknown and unverified individual. The case of the unverified claims Your July 11 blog entry in the Times of Israel regrettably mirrored this precise misstep, granting oxygen to demonstrably unverified assertions. You further compounded the error by endorsing Mr Lewis's contention that the South African media had, in some grand conspiracy, ignored his 'information'. In doing so, you effectively impugned the integrity of our media as a whole, suggesting it functions as a purveyor of misinformation or propaganda. The consequence was the discrediting of the South African media by both yourself and Mr Lewis. Mercifully, as you concede, 'industry colleagues' swiftly disabused you of the notion that you were pioneering in platforming an individual with a demonstrated propensity for manufacturing fictional narratives, a propensity, I might add, easily discernible with the most elementary of desktop searches. As you presumably easily discovered, hence your 'clarification' a mere two days after publication. One might ask whether you undertook an elementary search of Mr Lewis before publishing your 11 July blog that relied entirely on his unsubstantiated claims. There is simply no good answer to that question for you, as a journalist, is no doubt ostensibly committed to 'verified facts, credible sources, and balanced reporting'. A 'clarification' that only deepened the mire Upon realising the substantial credibility deficit of your source, you penned a damage-control 'clarification' on the very same Times of Israel blog. Here, you concede that your source and previous claims were, to be precise, baseless and unverified. One might have commended this acknowledgment of error, had it been accompanied by a modicum of self-reflection and contrition a recognition, perhaps, that a few swift Google searches might have spared you considerable embarrassment. Yet, astonishingly, you insist on the existence of 'global concerns' about 'South Africa's diplomatic posture toward Hamas and Iran'. 'Global concerns'? How many of the 193 United Nations member states have articulated such concern? I pause here to underscore that those who critique South Africa's bilateral relations with Iran seldom acknowledge that these relations, much like those with the State of Israel, predate our democratic government. It is, perhaps, convenient for some to portray these ties as a post-1994 phenomenon. I do, however, commend the discerning readers who promptly alerted you, Ms Slier, to the dubious nature of your July 11 blog post. Strangely, you appear to believe that the 'positive responses' you received somehow negate this. This raises a crucial question: why would one celebrate positive responses to unverified reporting? Again, in your July 13 entry, you seem to admit that, upon some semblance of verification on your part, the claims in your initial blog post cannot be substantiated. For instance, there is no application before any court that contains Mr Lewis' spectacular fables. Nonetheless, you doggedly insist this is an 'important lobby mechanism' and therefore you stand by your story. Essentially, we are to believe Mr Lewis simply because he said so, even in the face of unverified claims. The public deserves better It is fair to say that no serious person, let alone a journalist worth their salt, would publicly champion such a flimsy argument. The world, the readers of the Times of Israel and the listeners of Chai FM are profoundly ill-served by your work, Ms Slier. There are, in fact, credible voices who have cited South Africa's case before the International Court of Justice as providing compelling evidence of genocide in Gaza (including the court itself, on three separate occasions). One such voice is Israeli Dr Bartov, a professor of Holocaust and genocide studies at Brown University, in the venerable New York Times. He wrote: 'It appeared no longer possible to deny that the pattern of [Israel Defense Force] operations was consistent with the statements denoting genocidal intent made by Israeli leaders in the days after the Hamas attack,' including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's threat to turn Gaza into 'rubble' and his call for Israeli citizens to remember 'what Amalek did to you' — a reference to the biblical passage calling on the Israelites to 'kill alike men and women, infants and sucklings' in their fight against an ancient enemy. The continued denial of this designation by states, international organisations and legal and scholarly experts will cause unmitigated damage not just to the people of Gaza and Israel but also to the system of international law established in the wake of the horrors of the Holocaust, designed to prevent such atrocities from happening ever again.' South Africa's case has nothing to do with politics, nor with religion or ethnicity. It is about the conduct of a state that has signed the UN Charter, the Genocide Convention and numerous international instruments and manifestly and repeatedly violated them. It is about the equal application of international law. Our support for the right of self-determination of the Palestinian people is predicated on the enduring need to address the manifestation of an illegal settler colonial occupation. These instruments did not exist when the Herero people in Namibia were almost exterminated, or during the horrific period of the Holocaust. They existed in 1994 in Rwanda and Srebrenica, yet too few states pulled the levers put in place to stop them. Surely, we have learned from the lessons of the past and have vowed 'never again' to allow such atrocities to repeat. Surely, we cannot sit by and allow the logic that justified apartheid and previous tragedies to repeat themselves. South Africa has consistently called for an immediate ceasefire and a just peace, as well as for the return of all hostages held in captivity in Gaza and political prisoners — including children — who are incarcerated in Israeli prisons for advocating for the right of self-determination of the Palestinian people. This is what we must all be lobbying for: for the occupation to end and for the status quo to change for the better for the people of Israel and Palestine, not for unsubstantiated conspiracies propelled by name-droppers. By the way, in his email to the MRC, Mr Lewis inserts in 'his draft application' the following proviso: 'Subject to confirmation by our investigation whether SA President Ramaphosa knew about the alleged collaboration with an organisation the US, UK and the EU, a proclaimed terrorist organisation, or not.' Yes, you have read correctly: this from the very same person who declared there was 'evidence'. The world, the readers of the Times of Israel, and the listeners of Chai FM deserve better, Ms. Slier. We cannot accept clickbait, biased reporting that confirms unsubstantiated hogwash. As we mark Mandela month across the world, it may be prudent to remember what he said: 'But we know too well that our freedom is incomplete without the freedom of the Palestinians.' Indeed we cannot be free without the resolution of conflicts, including in Sudan and other parts of the world. Yours in verification and truth telling, Chrispin Phiri, spokesperson for the ministry of international relations and cooperation.
The Herald
3 hours ago
- The Herald
Two JMPD cops arrested after 'bribe money' found
Two Johannesburg metropolitan police department (JMPD) officers have been arrested on charges of extortion and corruption. This comes after a call from a distressed resident o n Saturday morning. 'The concerned citizen reported being extorted by officers, alleging that officers demanded R8,000 after accusing their company driver of fleeing an accident scene,' it said. They had the vehicle's registration details, which was tracked by JMPD internal affairs. Located at a BP garage in Parktown, a search of the vehicle and two male officers uncovered R5,340, 'much of which could not be accounted for and was suspected to be illicitly obtained. Some of the money was found concealed within the vehicle'. JMPD chief Patrick Jaca said: 'We urge the public to continue reporting any suspicious activities, as their vigilance is crucial in helping us maintain a trustworthy police service.' You can report corruption and unethical behaviour within the JMPD by calling the JMPD anti-fraud and corruption hotline: 0800-203-712 (toll-free), or in person by visiting the JMPD internal affairs directorate at Wemmer Complex 22, Loveday Street, Selby, Joburg. TimesLIVE
The Herald
3 hours ago
- The Herald
Knysna police probe suspected murder-suicide
Knysna police are investigating a suspected murder-suicide after a man and a woman were found dead in a house in Flenter Location. Police spokesperson Sergeant Christopher Spies said at about 4pm on Friday, a police officer accompanied a social worker to visit a woman at the house. 'On arrival, the police member forced the door of the residence open. 'They discovered the body of the woman, aged 31, with multiple stab wounds, on the bed. 'The body of a man, aged 37, was found with a rope around his neck. 'Both were declared dead by medical personnel on the scene.' Spies said it was believed the two had been in a relationship. The matter is under investigation. The Herald
