Push for change to eviction laws as SA informal settlements soar to 4,075

The Department of Human Settlements is reviewing legislation on the illegal occupation of land and houses in South Africa, as part of its strategy to address the rise in illegally occupied spaces.

In a presentation on the department’s strategy before the parliamentary human settlements committee in the National Assembly on Wednesday, Director-General Alec Moemi described the existing instruments to prevent illegal occupations as “overburdensome” and “rigid”. However, he said the department would continue to implement the existing laws to the best of its ability until the legislation had been amended.

“[We are] casting our eyes ahead that with the legislative review processes, and with the strength and capacity to be responsive, then we would be in a better position to proactively prevent [illegal occupation] from occurring, and even more importantly, to be swift in our response where we see an occurrence of this nature,” he said.

 According to the department, the number of informal settlements in South Africa have risen from 3,583 in 2021/22 to 4,075 in 2024/25. The three provinces with the highest number of informal settlements are Gauteng (886), Western Cape (802) and KwaZulu-Natal (621).

Review of the PIE Act

One piece of legislation the Department of Human Settlements is seeking to amend is the Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act (PIE Act), which contains the procedure that must be followed in an eviction application.

According to housing rights law centre Ndifuna Ukwazi, the Act sets out the duty of the court to consider all relevant circumstances in a household before an eviction order is granted. This includes the obligation on the part of the municipality, other organ of state or landowner to provide for the relocation of the occupier to an alternative site.

Rashnee Atkinson, chief director of Human Settlements Planning at the National Department of Human Settlements, told the committee, “As much as the PIE [Act] has contributed to a lot of the problems [in] that we cannot forcefully evict people, it also is there in place to ensure that people are not homeless, hence the court orders to ensure that, as government, we provide emergency housing as we seek a longer-term solution.”

The Sjwetla informal settlement along the Juskei River in Alexandra, Johannesburg. (Photo: Gallo Images / Sharon Seretlo)

“The court … applies the conditions to the eviction order, which municipalities and provinces then have to abide by. Where an eviction leads to homelessness … whatever rights [the landowners] have on their property are suspended until those illegal occupiers have been provided with alternative accommodation.

“Those are some of the challenges in terms of PIE [Act] and if we talk about amendments, we’re really talking about: how do we relieve the administrative burden on municipalities and provinces, landowners, in terms of applying the PIE Act,” said Atkinson.

The Department of Human Settlements said that it was reviewing the Act to “streamline eviction processes”, align it with the Draft White Paper on Human Settlements and address legislative gaps.

Read more: New white paper on human settlements threatens a core constitutional right

The draft White Paper, issued for public comment in December 2023, provides limited details on how the PIE Act should be amended, stating only, “Unlawful development must be discouraged severely. This entails reviewal [sic] of the PIE Act which requires alternative accommodation for illegal occupation of land.”

During the committee meeting, no mention was made of the DA’s Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Amendment Bill, submitted to Parliament by DA MP Emma Powell in early 2023.

The Bill seeks to:

• Introduce criminal sanctions for those who arrange the illegal occupation of land, even when they do not receive payment for doing so;


• Increase the sentence for arranging the illegal occupation of land from two to five years;


• Limit the length of time for which a municipality, other organ of state or landowner must provide alternative accommodation for evictees facing homelessness; and


• Expand the relevant circumstances the court must consider when granting an order for eviction to include factors such as the occupier’s financial means and intent.

Read more: DA amendments to PIE Act — An attempt to criminalise a lack of housing in a housing crisis

Read more: DA amendments to PIE Act aim to stop legislatively enabled expropriation without compensation

Housing crisis

Housing rights activists have raised concerns about potential amendments to the PIE Act and how they could affect the country’s most vulnerable.

Buhle Booi, Ndifuna Ukwazi head of political organising and campaigns, told Daily Maverick that the DA’s PIE Amendment Bill was introduced after the wave of illegal occupations that occurred during the Covid-19 pandemic, when people were pushed into homelessness by lay-offs. He opposed attempts to criminalise those who occupied land and housing.

“The PIE Act is the only form of legislation that protects occupiers from extrajudicial evictions from the state,” he said.

“We know very well that occupation is a civil issue, not a criminal issue… These are people who have no economic means. These are people who have been failed by this crippled housing system. In South Africa today, there’s a 3.7-million [person] housing crisis – people that are in the backlog, that are on the waiting list.

“The only option that people have is occupying as an act of trying to provide shelter for themselves and their families.”

Booi said that instead of amending legislation such as the PIE Act and further limiting the state’s obligation to provide alternative housing to evictees facing homelessness, the government should increase funding for social housing and make public land available for the building of homes.

“[The state] must grant people tenure security, even the people that are living in current occupations... so that people are able to better their lives in the spaces that they’re in,” he said.

“The Department [of Human Settlements]... must make grants available to start to build more social housing, to make sure that people live closer to social amenities. Those are the important discussions that the department must be preoccupied with, and not the amendment of progressive laws like the PIE Act, because they want to absolve themselves of the responsibility of providing security and homes for people.”

At Wednesday’s parliamentary committee meeting, Human Settlements’ Atkinson said that the department’s strategy to reduce illegal occupations also involved:

• Advising provinces and municipalities to release land parcels for development quickly and effectively;


• Pushing programmes for using inner city buildings for social and affordable housing;


• Strengthening the housing allocation system;


• Capacity building for municipalities to enhance local monitoring and enforcement around illegal occupation; and


• Increasing public awareness of legal housing options. DM