Security Practices at Body Corporate and the Challenge to Constitutional Rights in South Africa
In a recent finding by the Human Rights Commission (“HRC”), a complaint by a member of the Estate has highlighted severe security practices at Eagle Canyon Golf Estate, raising significant concerns about constitutional rights violations within South African private estates. The case reveals a complex interplay of security, privacy, and discrimination, striking at the heart of post-apartheid social justice issues.
Background of the Issue
The complaint centred around the allegation that the Body Corporate of Eagle Canyon Golf Estate was enforcing racist and xenophobic protocols. These included the requirement for domestic workers—primarily black people and foreign nationals—to undergo daily searches and show passports and work permits upon entry. Such practices are not only discriminatory but also deeply humiliating, treating these workers as potential criminals based on their occupation and racial profile.
Legal and Constitutional Implications
The investigation by the HRC revealed that these searches violated several fundamental rights enshrined in the South African Constitution:
Section 9 (Equality): The targeted searches clearly discriminate based on race, occupation, and nationality, directly contravening the Constitution’s equality provisions.
Section 10 (Human Dignity) and Section 14 (Privacy): These sections mandate the respect and protection of an individual’s dignity and privacy. The routine searches of domestic workers, which often involve the inspection of personal belongings without just cause, degrade their dignity and invade their privacy.
Notably, the Western Cape High Court had previously determined that poverty is a basis for unfair discrimination, and this principle directly applies to the treatment of domestic workers in cases like these.
Societal Impact and Recommendations
The practices at Eagle Canyon do not exist in isolation but are reflective of broader systemic issues that persist in South African gated communities. These communities often implement security measures that disproportionately affect lower socio-economic groups, perpetuating a cycle of discrimination and segregation.
The HRC has recommended that Eagle Canyon cease its invasive search protocols immediately. It also advised the association to consult with its members to develop less invasive security measures that comply with constitutional standards.
Conclusion
The Eagle Canyon case serves as a critical reminder of the challenges that South Africa faces in balancing security with constitutional rights. It highlights the need for ongoing vigilance and advocacy to ensure that all citizens, regardless of their socio-economic status or occupation, are treated with equality, dignity, and respect. The broader implications suggest a need for national introspection about the values and practices within gated communities, especially concerning how they align with the nation’s democratic and constitutional principles.
Article by Kim Bam, Managing Director at Bam Attorneys
ABOUT BAM LAW
If you have any questions related to sectional title living, the team at Bam Attorneys are qualified to assist. Email – kim@bamlaw.co.za
