The City of Johannesburg says it followed the right procedures and gave residents a chance to have their say on a CCTV bylaw before it was promulgated last week.
But the opposition DA says the city “quietly” pushed the law through without alerting ward councillors to it.
“There was an opportunity for public participation — twice,” said Sarah Wissler, chair of the city’s public safety committee. “It was online. The DA sit in the public safety committee, and they knew it was being passed, as it was discussed there.”
Joburg mayor Dada Morero confirmed to the Sunday Times on Friday that the bylaw was published for comment in February 2024 and again in November of that year after no input was received.
We’ve had so many incidents where the criminals would never have been caught if it weren’t for people sharing the footage from their own cameras
— André Snyman, eblockwatch
But he did not respond to a question about where it was published.
DA caucus leader Belinda Kayser-Echeozonjoku disagrees.
“A bylaw that has such far-reaching consequences [must have] inclusive public participation, to avoid any possible violations of constitutional provisions regarding the rights of individuals to protect themselves.”
The bylaw raised an outcry nationally when the Sunday Times revealed the regulations last week. It states that “no person may erect a CCTV camera or use or continue to use a CCTV camera ... without prior written approval of the city”. Residents and businesses must now apply to the municipality for permission to keep their cameras.
Even more contentious is that the bylaw states businesses and residents may not share footage from their CCTV cameras with anyone other than the police.
Kayser-Echeozonjoku said the city appeared to have “only done targeted stakeholder engagements and never included ward councillors, [who could have shared] this [information] further to residents who are now affected”.
“None of the ward councillors, or at least DA ward councillors, received this [information],” Kayser-Echeozonjoku said.
She believes there would have been a great many objections if residents had known the details of the new bylaw before it was promulgated last week.
“They should have consulted property owners who already pay rates to get their input. No individual property owners were informed, because their ward councillors never received this notice.
The city should have included the framework for the registration process, which would have included in the annexures the tariffs for registration [and] renewal, [the] full [registration] requirements, and [the relevant] time frames.
“That private property owners have to register [CCTV cameras] borders on the [infringement of the] constitutional right of residents to protect themselves.
“Not being able to share footage that you pay for, and which could potentially save lives, could also be seen as an infringement of [one’s] individual freedom to protect oneself. Most residents are [members of] street groups and CPF groups. [The bylaw] means that, if there is a break-in happening at one house in the street, the homeowners cannot share the footage in their WhatsApp group without the approval of law enforcement.
“There is also no [indication of] how long that approval process will take. [There could be] a hijacking that occurred in front of your house with a baby in the back seat of the car captured on CCTV footage, but you wouldn’t be able to share the footage without the approval of the [Johannesburg Metro Police Department] or the SAPS.
“The bylaw in its current form hampers crime prevention, and we are already not safe in this city. The [municipality] clearly did not do sufficient benchmarking with other cities to make a comparison. A bylaw is required, but in its current form it is unsustainable.”
She said the party was “exploring its options” regarding what action to take against the bylaw.
The bylaw has been slated by crime activists André Snyman and Yusuf Abramjee, who say being able to share CCTV footage is crucial in the fight against crime.
“We’ve had so many incidents where the criminals would never have been caught if it weren’t for people sharing the footage from their own cameras,” said Snyman of eblockwatch — a network of South Africans who have banded together to forewarn each other of criminal activity and pending danger. “Security companies and community policing forums using CCTV footage to track and trace criminals are working. Why would you take this important tool away?”
Abramjee said a municipal bylaw could not trump the public interest.
“How can they stop me from sharing footage if it is in the public interest? This new bylaw is here simply because social media has made the state’s failures in curbing crime too visible. I post hundreds of crime videos a month. If it weren’t for social media users like me, residents would have no idea about the extent of crime in our country.”
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.