The developers of a R4.5bn office park, the City of Cape Town, a group of First Nations People and the Western Cape government have lost the right to appeal against an urgent interdict stopping construction, which was to include low-cost housing and a public park.
This means the ban remains in place and the 750 workers on site remain unable to work pending a review of the project. That could mean an entirely new legal process.
The Africa headquarters of e-commerce giant Amazon is expected to be located in the Cape Town office park.
Cape Town deputy judge president Patricia Goliath interdicted the construction in March and ordered fresh consultations with Khoi and San people, some of whom are opposed to the development.
On Tuesday afternoon Goliath handed down a new judgment denying the groups leave to appeal against her ban. She ruled it was unlikely they would succeed in another court.
The developer, the Liesbeek Leisure Properties Trust (LPPT), said the continued delay in construction is a massive blow to all the people of Cape Town who stand to lose significant economic, social, heritage and environmental benefits.
They will approach the Supreme Court of Appeal for permission to appeal against Goliath’s interdict.
If the development collapses due to lengthy legal battles, the LPPT says 6,000 direct jobs and 19,000 indirect ones will be lost.
The development envisages turning a private golf course into an office park, a public park with 6km of cycling trails, an indigenous garden, and a First Nations heritage centre. The developers would set aside R38m to rehabilitate two rivers.
The City of Cape Town said in court that halting construction would “inflict unjustifiable and irreparable harm on Cape Town’s economy at a time of crisis”.
The development was supported by eight First Nations groups, who say they represent the Cape Peninsula Khoi. But it was opposed by the Goringhaicona Khoi Khoin indigenous council and the Observatory Civic Association, led by university professor Leslie London, who asked the court to halt construction.
The opposition groups argued that the laying of concrete and the construction of tall buildings would damage land that is of cultural and spiritual significance to the Khoi and San communities.
The matter ultimately revolves around how the state balances the rights of indigenous peoples and their link to land in the absence of any tangible heritage markers, such as gravesites or archaeological remains, against economic interests in a country where more than one in five people are unemployed.
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.