Beach property dispute takes discriminatory turn

A WALVIS BAY businessman who is challenging the exclusive sale of beachfront plots to blacks as racial bias presided over discrimination policies until some years after Namibian Independence.

Willem Grobbelaar, a property developer, was a Walvis Bay councillor when the town enforced racial segregation in the acquisition of seaside plots until 1994. He and fellow Walvis Bay resident and property developer Herman Martin Georg Davin have launched a landmark High Court case, asking for its urgent intervention to stop the transfer of the plots and to reverse the auction.The outcome could halt or accelerate affirmative action and black empowerment schemes in Namibia.Grobbelaar has argued in court papers that the town council used unconstitutional racial discriminatory practices to deny him an opportunity to buy land.The municipality has responded that it was precisely because of the anti-black policies that Grobbelaar practised as a councillor, that they had reserved plots for the “previously disadvantaged or excluded Namibians” to “redress the past discriminatory practices”.”Neither the erf or any portions thereof shall be transferred, leased or in any other way granted or disposed of to any person other than a white person, and no non-white, other than the bona fide non-white domestic servants who actually and exclusively perform their duties on the erf, shall be permitted to reside on the erf or any portion thereof or to occupy it in any other manner.”Walvis Bay Chief Executive Officer Augustinus Katiti quoted the statement from the gazette of the Cape of Good Hope Province in setting up Langstrand (Long Beach), one of the areas where plots were auctioned in December.The Walvis Bay Enclave was considered a part of South Africa until 1994.In an answering affidavit, Katiti said the property developer – who is the first applicant – bought a plot at Long Beach in 1989 for R12 000 under the whites-only policy.”The first applicant at that stage was content to take advantage of patently discriminatory apartheid practices for investment purposes and thereafter, during his tenure as a councillor from 1990 to 1994, approved and further condoned this racist condition by failing to take any steps for its removal,” said Katiti.In 1994, the town council – of which Grobbelaar was a part – passed a resolution that compelled black messengers of the municipality to deliver private messages for white staff.Referring to this as a “mindset prevalent at the time”, the Walvis Bay chief administrator said that the council needed to change after the town became part of Namibia.”Currently, all residential property bordering on the lagoon on the Esplanade, adjacent to Meersig, are exclusively owned by whites,” he said.Giving the “previously disadvantaged or excluded Namibians” first option was meant as “at least some form of corrective action”, Katiti argued.Grobbelaar said in his application that, apart from racial discrimination, the municipality had flouted procedures laid out in the Local Authorities Act.He argued that the council failed to advertise the auction properly and within the prescribed period; that the condition of sale prohibiting whites from bidding was not contained in newspaper advertisements; that neither were deposits paid nor were contracts signed to seal the auction sales and that many plots were not sold at the auction but in private transactions.Grobbelaar said his rights as a businessman and citizen were impugned, drawing his strength from Article 16 of the Namibian Constitution.The Walvis Bay municipality said procedures had been “substantially” met.The council also relied on Article 23 of the Constitution for affirmative action and to justify excluding whites.Katiti suggested in the court papers that Grobbelaar’s urgent and review application not be taken seriously because, as a property developer and a former councillor, he had known about the council’s reservation policy for blacks since 1998.The only concession Katiti made was that the sale of Erf 1096 was invalid because it had not been included in newspaper advertisements.The plot was sold to Joan Guriras, wife of Prime Minister Theo-Ben Gurirab.The town’s lawyers have asked that the case, which is expected to come to court on March 25, be dismissed with costs.He and fellow Walvis Bay resident and property developer Herman Martin Georg Davin have launched a landmark High Court case, asking for its urgent intervention to stop the transfer of the plots and to reverse the auction.The outcome could halt or accelerate affirmative action and black empowerment schemes in Namibia.Grobbelaar has argued in court papers that the town council used unconstitutional racial discriminatory practices to deny him an opportunity to buy land.The municipality has responded that it was precisely because of the anti-black policies that Grobbelaar practised as a councillor, that they had reserved plots for the “previously disadvantaged or excluded Namibians” to “redress the past discriminatory practices”.”Neither the erf or any portions thereof shall be transferred, leased or in any other way granted or disposed of to any person other than a white person, and no non-white, other than the bona fide non-white domestic servants who actually and exclusively perform their duties on the erf, shall be permitted to reside on the erf or any portion thereof or to occupy it in any other manner.”Walvis Bay Chief Executive Officer Augustinus Katiti quoted the statement from the gazette of the Cape of Good Hope Province in setting up Langstrand (Long Beach), one of the areas where plots were auctioned in December.The Walvis Bay Enclave was considered a part of South Africa until 1994.In an answering affidavit, Katiti said the property developer – who is the first applicant – bought a plot at Long Beach in 1989 for R12 000 under the whites-only policy.”The first applicant at that stage was content to take advantage of patently discriminatory apartheid practices for investment purposes and thereafter, during his tenure as a councillor from 1990 to 1994, approved and further condoned this racist condition by failing to take any steps for its removal,” said Katiti.In 1994, the town council – of which Grobbelaar was a part – passed a resolution that compelled black messengers of the municipality to deliver private messages for white staff.Referring to this as a “mindset prevalent at the time”, the Walvis Bay chief administrator said that the council needed to change after the town became part of Namibia.”Currently, all residential property bordering on the lagoon on the Esplanade, adjacent to Meersig, are exclusively owned by whites,” he said.Giving the “previously disadvantaged or excluded Namibians” first option was meant as “at least some form of corrective action”, Katiti argued.Grobbelaar said in his application that, apart from racial discrimination, the municipality had flouted procedures laid out in the Local Authorities Act.He argued that the council failed to advertise the auction properly and within the prescribed period; that the condition of sale prohibiting whites from bidding was not contained in newspaper advertisements; that neither were deposits paid nor were contracts signed to seal the auction sales and that many plots were not sold at the auction but in private transactions.Grobbelaar said his rights as a businessman and citizen were impugned, drawing his strength from Article 16 of the Namibian Constitution.The Walvis Bay municipality said procedures had been “substantially” met.The council also relied on Article 23 of the Constitution for affirmative action and to justify excluding whites.Katiti suggested in the court papers that Grobbelaar’s urgent and review application not be taken seriously because, as a property developer and a former councillor, he had known about the council’s reservation policy for blacks since 1998.The only concession Katiti made was that the sale of Erf 1096 was invalid because it had not been included in newspaper advertisements.The plot was sold to Joan Guriras, wife of Prime Minister Theo-Ben Gurirab.The town’s lawyers have asked
that the case, which is expected to come to court on March 25, be dismissed with costs.