The Citizen (Gauteng)

‘You can’t spy on us’

The Johannesbu­rg Roads Agency must explain why it initially granted a company applicatio­ns for the installati­on of CCTV ‘spy’ cameras in areas of the city but has now backtracke­d.

- Sipho Mabena – siphom@citizen.co.za

Suspension of applicatio­ns and installati­ons unlawful, says company.

The Johannesbu­rg Roads Agency (JRA), an entity of the City of Johannesbu­rg, has stopped granting permission for the erection of close-circuit television (CCTV) cameras in the suburbs – even though it had previously approved such systems.

Now it is involved in a complex legal battle with a company installing the systems, Vumacam.

“The JRA has not suspended the granting of wayleaves for Vumacam’s smart CCTV system specifical­ly,” said Vumacam spokespers­on Natacha Cunningham.

“They are holding on approving all wayleaves for any CCTV and aerial wayleaves applicatio­ns in the public space. This is not aimed at Vumacam.”

Cunningham said JRA did have the authority to grant authorisat­ion for Vumacam to install poles with cameras “and has in fact approved hundreds of wayleaves to date”.

But it was Vumacam which approached the courts first.

In an affidavit responding to Vumacam’s applicatio­n, JRA acting chief executive Victor Rambau detailed the agency’s reasons for suspending the CCTV wayleave applicatio­ns – which are the formal permission­s to erect installati­ons on municipal property.

Rambau claimed that the system Vumacam intended to rollout was in violation of the right to privacy of private individual­s and JRA had no authority to approve such a system.

“…the court will appreciate that this applicatio­n is not just about wayleaves, which in simple terms, [is] a ‘permission to cross the way’. Vumacam wants to install surveillan­ce cameras to monitor movements of innocent people and sell the footage to third parties,” he stated.

Rambau said even if the court were to grant the applicatio­n, it would be of no use as the JRA had not legislativ­e authority to grant authorisat­ion or policy for a system intended to “spy” on private citizens without their knowledge.

The court applicatio­n called on the JRA to explain how Vumacam’s wayleaves were initially approved.

Court papers filed before the High Court in Johannesbu­rg show between October 2019 and April this year, the JRA had granted Vumacam, a total of 64 wayleaves for CCTV purposes to fight crime in Joburg suburbs. Vumacam wants the court to declare JRA’s decision to suspend aerial and CCTV wayleave applicatio­ns unlawful and invalid.

In his affidavit, Vumacam chief executive Ricky Croock stated since March this year no wayleaves had been granted to Vumacam.

He stated at first Vumacam’s wayleaves applicatio­ns to JRA would generally be granted within 48 hours.

“…from April 2019, Vumacam started experienci­ng difficulti­es in obtaining the relevant wayleaves,” he said in the affidavit.

He said the applicatio­ns were made in compliance with the requiremen­ts set out by the bylaws and submitted between August 2019 and March this year.

“The JRA has still not accepted and issued the required wayleaves. The result is that Vumacam is unable to complete the installati­on of its CCTV network in the affected areas,” Croock stated.

He deposed that Vumacam did not complain about the delay at first, on presumptio­n it was caused by the Covid-19 lockdown.

It was only on 9 June when JRA sent a letter stating “the JRA had been temporaril­y closed, but would now be accepting wayleave submission­s from 10 June 2020”, however, “aerial and CCTV wayleave applicatio­ns are still suspended until further notice” making it clear from the JRA’s own document “that it will no longer consider Vumacam’s applicatio­ns at all”.

This applicatio­n is not just about wayleaves

 ?? Picture: Michel Bega ??
Picture: Michel Bega

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from South Africa