Fundamento destacado. 35. El derecho recogido en el artículo 26(1) es un derecho de «acceso a una vivienda adecuada», distinto del derecho a una vivienda adecuada recogido en el Pacto. Esta diferencia es significativa. Reconoce que la vivienda implica algo más que ladrillos y cemento. Requiere terrenos disponibles, servicios apropiados como el suministro de agua y la eliminación de aguas residuales y la financiación de todo ello, incluida la construcción de la propia casa. Para que una persona tenga acceso a una vivienda adecuada deben cumplirse todas estas condiciones: debe haber terreno, debe haber servicios, debe haber una vivienda. Por lo tanto, el acceso al suelo con fines de vivienda se incluye en el derecho de acceso a una vivienda adecuada del artículo 26. Un derecho de acceso a una vivienda adecuada también sugiere que no sólo el Estado es responsable de la provisión de viviendas, sino que otros agentes de nuestra sociedad, incluidos los propios individuos, deben estar capacitados mediante medidas legislativas y de otro tipo para proporcionar una vivienda. El Estado debe crear las condiciones de acceso a una vivienda adecuada para las personas de todos los niveles económicos de nuestra sociedad. Por lo tanto, la política estatal en materia de vivienda debe tener en cuenta los diferentes niveles económicos de nuestra sociedad.
[Traducción de LP]
35. The right delineated in section 26(1) is a right of “access to adequate housing” as distinct from the right to adequate housing encapsulated in the Covenant. This difference is significant. It recognises that housing entails more than bricks and mortar. It requires available land, appropriate services such as the provision of water and the removal of sewage and the financing of all of these, including the building of the house itself. For a person to have access to adequate housing all of these conditions need to be met: there must be land, there must be services, there must be a dwelling. Access to land for the purpose of housing is therefore included in the right of access to adequate housing in section 26. A right of access to adequate housing also suggests that it is not only the state who is responsible for the provision of houses, but that other agents within our society, including individuals themselves, must be enabled by legislative and other measures to provide housing. The state must create the conditions for access to adequate housing for people at all economic levels of our society. State policy dealing with housing must therefore take account of different economic levels in our society.
[Idioma original]
CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
Case CCT 11/00
THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA First Appellant
THE PREMIER OF THE PROVINCE OF THE WESTERN CAPE Second Appellant
CAPE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Third Appellant
OOSTENBERG MUNICIPALITY Fourth Appellant
versus
IRENE GROOTBOOM
AND OTHERS Respondents
Heard on : 11 May 2000
Decided on : 4 October 2000
JUDGMENT
YACOOB J:
A. Introduction
[1] The people of South Africa are committed to the attainment of social justice and the improvement of the quality of life for everyone. The Preamble to our Constitution records this commitment. The Constitution declares the founding values of our society to be “[h]uman dignity, the achievement of equality and the advancement of human rights and freedoms.”[1] This case grapples with the realisation of these aspirations for it concerns the state’s constitutional obligations in relation to housing: a constitutional issue of fundamental importance to the development of South Africa’s new constitutional order.
[2] The issues here remind us of the intolerable conditions under which many of our people are still living. The respondents are but a fraction of them. It is also a reminder that unless the plight of these communities is alleviated, people may be tempted to take the law into their own hands in order to escape these conditions. The case brings home the harsh reality that the Constitution’s promise of dignity and equality for all remains for many a distant dream. People should not be impelled by intolerable living conditions to resort to land invasions. Self-help of this kind cannot be tolerated, for the unavailability of land suitable for housing development is a key factor in the fight against the country’s housing shortage.
[3] The group of people with whom we are concerned in these proceedings lived in appalling conditions, decided to move out and illegally occupied someone else’s land. They were evicted and left homeless. The root cause of their problems is the intolerable conditions under which they were living while waiting in the queue for their turn to be allocated low-cost housing. They are the people whose constitutional rights have to be determined in this case.
[Continúa…]
Descargue la resolución aquí
[1] See section 1(a) of the Constitution.
 es un derecho de «acceso a una vivienda adecuada», distinto del derecho a una vivienda adecuada...){kind=link}