The low‑key “race war” waged on the shores of the North West’s Hartbeespoort Dam is far from over, with claims of human rights abuses now extending beyond land leases to noise complaints against black‑owned establishments.
A resident, speaking anonymously, said that for the past 18 months, weekends have been dominated by “thunderous” live music at Legacy on the Dam, continuing into the early hours of Sunday.
“These disturbances directly infringe on rights to dignity, privacy, and an environment not harmful to health or well‑being, rights that apply irrespective of race,” he said.
Narrow debate, unresolved grievances
The resident argued that this reflected a broader pattern of regulatory non‑compliance compounded by ineffective enforcement.
The dispute unfolds against the backdrop of the South African Human Rights Commission’s (SAHRC) finding of systemic racial discrimination and administrative failures in the allocation of state‑owned land along the dam shoreline, where black applicants were sidelined in favour of white occupants.
Yet the Hartbeespoort Community Development Initiative (HCDI), complainants in the SAHRC matter, rejected the report as incomplete and appealed its findings.
According to the resident, the appeal raised serious concerns but public debate remained narrow, focusing on lease allocations while overlooking illegal activities and enforcement failures affecting residents.
The SAHRC report acknowledged that noise disturbances may constitute a human rights concern but said these matters had been adequately addressed through general directives.
ALSO READ: SAHRC exposes racial bias in Hartbeespoort land leases
Bubbles Champagne Garden, burnt down last year in an alleged arson attack linked to escalating racial tensions, is one of two black‑owned establishments blamed for nuisance.
Claims of unequal treatment
But owner Thabiso Mathibedi countered that white‑owned venues host live music without complaint.
“Is it because events curated for white audiences are accepted without permits, while festivals by black businesses for diverse cultures are deemed unacceptable?” he asked.
Mathibedi recalled that his application to occupy was objected to by white occupants in 2018 without valid reason.
He argued that now, as black entrepreneurs gain access to land, disgruntled individuals clinging to apartheid‑era attitudes are crying foul.
“The aim is to block and hide historical transgressions and illegal occupation,” he said.
“Even government officials are refused entry into state land to conduct inspections; municipal roads have been illegally blocked to prevent black lease applicants from accessing allocated land.”
Resistance to black occupation claims
Hartley Ngoato, owner of Legacy on the Dam, said complainants remained anonymous because they knew their statements would be discredited.
ALSO READ: SAHRC slammed for ‘dishonest’ Hartbeespoort land lease probe report
“Every time there is loud music, I get calls from white residents – even when my establishment is closed,” he said.
“There are many white‑owned places hosting festivals, but there is never a complaint.”
Ngoato insisted the com‑plaints were racially motivated attempts to keep black people off state‑owned land.
Mmeli Mdluli, founder of HCDI and complainant in the SAHRC investigation, noted that white residents previously occupied the shoreline without leases and without objections over noise or environmental impact.
He said unequal treatment persisted for years to the exclusion of black applicants.
“On what basis were objections raised even before black applicants had occupied the land or commenced activities?” Mdluli asked.
“Documentary records dating back to 2017 show resistance existed prior to any alleged disturbance.”
For Mdluli, the pattern suggests that complaints are less about noise levels and more about resistance to black occupation of state land.
NOW READ: Hartbeespoort Dam lease complainants call for ‘superficial’ SAHRC report to be set aside
About the Author
