Mugabe gets “elected” by default because no-one is prepared to stand against him.
No rules or law applies to him.
His opponents get crushed through character assassination (or worse).
He allows his lieutenants and followers to grab land which does not belong to them.
Sound familiar?
Marina Da Gama now has it’s own little land-grabs too. Public open space being stolen from the ordinary citizens …
… under the guise of security (are we now going to fence of the sea for the “public’s safety” too?) …
… and more and more little bits of land is being stolen from its rightful owners.
Should we just sit back and accept this?
2 users commented in " Marina Da Gama - a Little Zimbabwe? "
Follow-up comment rss or Leave a TrackbackBut isn’t that Richard Gie’s house? So let me get this straight - if I want to picnic and let the kiddies put a canoe in the water I must knock on HIS door to get the key? What if he isn’t home? Forget about the association - they’re closed on weekends. But why must anyone explain themselves to Richard Gie or the association when it comes to public-use Council property? More importantly what about those off-water properties that enjoy rights of access to the water across these erven in terms of their title deeds?????? Did Council approve this? Were all affected properties formally notified before their property rights were unilaterally negated? What says the Ward Councillor who lives down the road? Or is he too biased to take a stand? Who is going to compensate those property owners for the loss in value when they sell their homes minus the attaching water access rights that must carry some value?
For those in the dark, Marina da Gama is not an enclosed private estate. It’s a suburb with public roads and spaces where some residents have entrenched rights of access to water across certain erven. At the very least they need to be consulted by Council. The MDGA and perhaps this time Helen Zille obo the City of CT must please explain…
I find it hillarious that the public is being protected from water bordering on public area. Who thought upt this particular load of garbage? For goodness sakes, who do they think they are fooling? It is criminal that public open spaces are thus annexed. I think JT got it right. Why should anyone please explain to Richard Gie why they want to use this area.
Mr. Qually, what are you going to do about it?
Leave A Reply