The leader of a group against the construction of Amazon headquarters in Cape Town is fighting a recent court ruling that stopped an interdict to halt development at the site.
This, after an interdict granted in the Western Cape High Court earlier this year, which stopped development of the R4.6 billion River Club development, was rescinded.
The courts ruled the interdict was obtained “through fraud”.
Judges Elizabeth Baartman, Hayley Slingers and James Lekhuleni ruled last month that Tauriq Jenkins, who purported to act on behalf of the Goringhaicona Khoi Khoin Indigenous Traditional Council (GKKITC) in the interdict application which was decided by deputy judge president Patricia Goliath, “was determined to stop the development at all costs”.
Now Jenkins, who says he is the high commissioner of the GKKITC, this week lodged an application seeking leave to appeal the recent judgement that stripped him of his authority to oppose the River Club development in the courts on behalf of the GKKITC.
The Liesbeek Action Campaign, which is also challenging the construction, yesterday issued a statement saying the application is a necessary response to the personal and legal attacks that Jenkins has been subjected to as a result of his unwavering opposition to the private developer, Liesbeek Leisure Property Trust, and its associates.
It says in challenging Jenkins’s power of attorney in the fight against the development, a resolution drawn up by individuals claiming to be the “GKKITC National Executive Council” displayed multiple contradictions and inconsistencies.
“Therefore, it did not give their purported leader, Edmen Hansen, any standing to bring his court action against Jenkins,” says the group.
The members of the Liesbeek Action Campaign are concerned the construction on the floodplain between the Black and Liesbeek rivers would lead to the land losing its historical significance and result in increased risk of flooding and environmental exploitation.
They also allege illegal construction procedures were followed without the approval of all parties involved, in an attempt to hasten the building of the site.
The group says this week’s appeal notice points out the multiple inconsistencies overlooked by the court in accepting the locus standi of Hansen.
It explains the notice highlights how the urgency with which the action was pursued by Hansen led to a violation of Jenkins’s Constitutional and other rights.
“The leave to appeal also indicates that, when the court refused late filing of an affidavit from Jenkins and postponement of the proceedings, these decisions could not have been made reasonably. The notice says the court failed to exercise its discretion judicially, was influenced by wrong principle and was misdirected on the facts.
“While the application for leave to appeal is being considered, the effect of the application is that not only is the rescission application (ie, the challenge to HC Jenkins’s authority) suspended, but the interim order is still in place.”
According to the group, this means the contempt of court application can still be pursued.
“This relates to Judge Patricia Goliath’s 18 March interdict halting construction at the River Club, which the developer ignored.
“As a unified campaign, we will continue the fight for recognition of the heritage significance of the site, which is currently being considered for protection by SAHRA [South African Heritage Resources Agency]. And we will continue to fight for indigenous voices to be heard, those many voices that have not been co-opted by corporations.”
Share