Key Takeaways
- Mayor Geordin Hill‑Lewis dismissed the term “spatial apartheid” as propaganda, sparking a PR controversy.
- The Constitutional Court unanimously ruled that his party perpetuated the legacy of spatial apartheid by failing to provide affordable housing in well‑located areas such as Sea Point.
- The judgment obliges the City of Cape Town and the Western Cape government to report housing pipelines and budgets within three months.
- The Tafelberg Remedial School sale in Sea Point became the flashpoint for a decade‑long legal battle led by Reclaim the City and Ndifuna Ukwazi.
- Despite earlier High Court victories for activists, provincial appeals delayed implementation until the 2025 Constitutional Court decision.
Overview of the Mayor’s Comments and Subsequent PR Crisis
In October 2025 Cape Town mayor Geordin Hill‑Lewis told Daily Maverick that describing the city’s housing inequities as “spatial apartheid” was “a kind of propaganda language that is no longer rooted in reality.” His remarks triggered a minor public‑relations backlash, after which he clarified through his aide that he was critiquing the activists’ narrative, not denying the existence of apartheid‑era spatial legacies. The controversy set the stage for a landmark judicial showdown just months later.
Constitutional Court’s Unanimous Judgment
On 2 July 2025 nine judges of the Constitutional Court delivered a unanimous ruling that the Hill‑Lewis‑led City of Cape Town, aided by the Western Cape provincial government, had indeed been perpetuating the legacy of spatial apartheid. The decision came amid a nationwide crisis threatening xenophobic and ethnic violence, underscoring the gravity of the court’s intervention in Cape Town’s housing policy.
Judicial Reasoning on Spatial Inequality
Justice Nonkosi Mhlantla, writing for the Bench, opened the judgment by highlighting the distinction between merely distributing resources and ensuring those resources actively dismantle historical race‑ and class‑based inequalities along geographical lines. The Court emphasized that the Constitution’s sections 25 and 26 oblige the state to consider location when providing affordable housing, specifically requiring such housing in both the CBD and the historically white, upmarket suburb of Sea Point.
The Tafelberg School Sale as the Catalyst
The dispute originated in January 2016 when the Western Cape government, under then‑premier Helen Zille, sold the mothballed Tafelberg Remedial School on Sea Point’s Main Road to the Phyllis Jowell Jewish Day School for R135 million. Activists argued that the sale ignored the needs of Sea Point’s service workers—waiters, cleaners, nurses, and childminders—who endured long commutes from the Cape Flats. The vacant buildings became a potent symbol of the city’s spatial imbalance.
High Court Victory and Provincial Appeal
In May 2017 Thozama Angela Adonisi, a nurse and Reclaim the City leader, launched the founding affidavit challenging the Tafelberg sale. On 31 August 2020 the Western Cape High Court ruled the sale unconstitutional, ordering redress. Less than three weeks later, Premier Alan Winde affirmed commitment to spatial redress yet announced an appeal against the judgment, delaying implementation and prolonging the activists’ struggle.
Developments in 2024: Legal Setbacks and Cultural Amplification
April 2024 saw the Supreme Court of Appeal side with the provincial government, reversing the High Court’s advantage for activists. Later that June, the documentary Mother City—produced by Pearlie Joubert and Miki Redelinghuys—premiered at Sheffield DocFest, framing Cape Town’s development agenda as a “daring urban revolution” and centering the Tafelberg case. The film intensified public discourse on spatial apartheid and kept the issue in the national spotlight.
Daily Maverick Feature and the Mayor’s Interview
In September 2025 Daily Maverick published “Sea Point’s broken promises — no place for old locals,” noting that working‑ and middle‑income Capetonians alike were excluded from central districts. The piece led to an interview with Mayor Hill‑Lewis, who defended his administration’s housing record, claiming over 12 000 affordable units were in various stages of development. When asked about “spatial apartheid,” he labelled the term propaganda, reigniting the PR controversy.
Activist Persistence and the Mayor’s Clarifications
Following the interview, affordable‑housing activist Nkosikhona Swartbooi continued to speak at Reclaim the City rallies, insisting the legacy of spatial apartheid remained real. Hill‑Lewis, via his personal assistant, later insisted he was commenting on the activists’ narrative, not denying apartheid’s spatial legacy. He reiterated this stance in a February 2026 on‑stage Q&A with Dan Corder, maintaining that accusing the city of actively perpetuating spatial apartheid was “propaganda nonsense.”
Significance and Implications of the Constitutional Court Ruling
The Court’s judgment not only affirmed the activists’ decade‑long claim but also imposed a concrete remedial duty: the City of Cape Town and Western Cape government must submit housing pipelines and budgets within three months. This directive addresses the core constitutional mandate to locate affordable housing in well‑located areas, directly challenging development policies that prioritize tourism and economic growth over equitable access. The ruling thus marks a pivotal turn in South Africa’s post‑apartheid journey toward spatial justice.