The South African Schools Act says that the governing body of a public school must determine the admission policy of that school. While this is the case, schools still turn away learners due to their disabilities and special needs [1]. The Act further says that no learner should be put on the waiting list; their names are supposed to be placed on a central database if schools cannot accommodate them. It also states that all children between the ages of 5 and 15 have to go to school, this includes children with disabilities and special needs. The Constitution, the National Development Plan, the Sustainable Development Goals, and the Incheon Declaration of the World Education Forum all confirm that the state has a commitment to provide schooling for children with disabilities. The Department of Basic Education needs to ensure that the Act is adhered to, and that governing bodies do not violate the children's rights to an inclusive and special education. [1] Disabled and out of school, Stephanie Kelly for Groundup News. 13 June 2016.

The proclamation, which has been ready since May, will enable the interim board to begin to unpack the extent of fraud, irregularities, and wasteful, fruitless expenditure at the SABC. The SIU investigation is a critical component in the process of restoring the SABC, holding wrongdoers accountable and recovering monies due to the public broadcaster. According to the ad hoc committee report [1] on the inquiry of the SABC released in February this year, the SABC has deviated from its mandate as the public broadcaster. During his tenure as the SABC’s GCOO, Hlaudi Motsoeneng flouted several governance rules, codes and laws, including judgments from the courts and ICASA. Hlaudi’s mismanagement and abuse of power has resulted in a public broadcaster that is financially unsustainable and has compromised the editorial integrity of the SABC. Furthermore, in 2013 the SABC and MultiChoice signed a R533m contract to give the pay-TV company the right to air two of the public broadcaster’s channels. In December 2016, it was revealed that, after the deal was contract in 2014, the SABC’s Hlaudi Motsoeneng scored an alleged R33m bonus, R11.4m of which he has already been paid [2]. As it stands, the interim board only has two months left before the end of its tenure, and this SIU investigation is central to the work that it has been commissioned to do. It is unacceptable that at this stage in the process, the President still hasn’t signed the proclamation. The need for a reliable and accurate public broadcaster cannot be overstated in a country like South Africa, where a substantial number of people receive their information primarily through the broadcast media. This means that broadcast news may be the only media which is accessible for the majority of South Africans. A dysfunctional SABC, therefore, prevents us from truly protecting and enhancing the fundamental rights of all citizens to freedom of information. * http://www.soscoalition.org.za/media-release-mr-president-just-sign-the-proclamation/ [1] https://pmg.org.za/page/https://pmg.org.za/tabled-committee-report/2898?via=homepage-feature-card [2] SABC, Multichoice deal must be probed - leaked Parliamentary inquiry document, Thulani Gqirana for News24. 18 January 2017.

A basic income grant will provide families with assistance to send their children and young girls to school, access to opportunities that will end generational poverty traps, increase basic education as a priority and achieve greater gender equality. The introduction of a universal cash transfer, predominantly funded through extractive industries, will be a remarkable stride towards poverty eradication, reduced inequalities among Africans, equal economic participation and overall African unity.  The SADC BIG amount will be US$15 per person, per month on introduction and should be inflation indexed. A functioning social protection system that embeds basic income as a fundamental human right to the benefit of all who reside on the continent should not be reduced to hand-outs to the poor, but rather conceptualised and accepted as a developmental policy mechanism to promote economic justice, reduce poverty and inequality and stimulate human and economic integration, as well as harness social cohesion across our porous regional borders. Examples of social grants in countries such as Namibia, South Africa and Malawi have shown the importance of alternative social protection initiatives such a SADC Basic Income Grant (BIG) to tackle poverty.  The SADC BIG Coalition shares a common vision to eradicate poverty and reduce inequality in SADC and promote the roll out of social protection in the region in accordance with the SADC Social Charter. This will enable the continent’s poorest households to better meet their basic needs through providing everyone with a minimum level of income thus affirming and supporting the inherent dignity for all.

The MPRDA of 2002, even though it was later amended, still does not afford any opportunity for consultation with and consent by communities as prescribed in Free Prior and Informed Consent(FPIC). This infringes on the rights of communities to influence decisions about old and new mining in their areas. It contains limited rights on community consultations (It only addressed mitigation of environmental impacts). Communities are still not given space to negotiate the contents of the old and new rights. The MPRDA of 2002 also separates the surface rights from the mineral rights, and converted old order rights of mining companies to mine on communal land to new ones without consulting communities to listen to their views. The Act states that the conversion is automatically granted for as long as the company can show that it has a Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) partner and that the Municipality has agreed to a social labour plan providing for housing and local economic development plans. Once this has been checked, new mining can happen without any consent by the community. All that is required under section 5(a) is a 21 days written notice before mining commences. This cannot be right.

The Constitution recognises the informal or customary rights of people living in the former homelands yet the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform has failed to legislate a communal land rights law that will strengthen and protect these rights. As a result; * Big cooperates are grabbing land in the communal land without any compensation for loss citing development. * Nature of individuals and family rights within a broader community are not clarified, and overshadowed by majority in the community. * People are not adequately compensated when land is sold or awarded for big developments * Consultation and Consent of land occupiers is not respected because of the weak nature of the rights provided by current law. In 1996, Parliament passed the Interim Protection of Informal Land Rights Act (IPILRA) to provide protection for all people living on communal land in the former Bantustans, people living on trust land, people who previously had Permissions to Occupy (PTOs) and anyone living on land uninterrupted since 1997 “as if they were the owner”. This was a big milestone in the protection and recognition of customary land rights and the empowerment of families to be part of bargaining and negotiations of any socio-economic development happening in their land. Although people are protected by IPILRA, the fact that it is temporary and can be renewed annually, deprives people of their rights to say NO to development that disadvantages them. This makes it easy for "developers" or Government to easily expropriate the land. It is also worth noting that the law also states that the Minister of Rural Development and Land Reform can make regulations in terms of IPILRA to provide more detailed processes and procedures.

Any law that seeks to facilitate recognition of previously marginalised group or any development of land belonging to the people must ensure that community consultation and consent is at the centre. The TKLB closes down that space and excludes ordinary people from being consulted and give consent on decisions that will affect their lives. There needs to be meaningful public participation. As it stands, the TKLB only highlights consultations with high profile structures such as the House of Traditional Leaders, royal families and traditional councils and there is no mention of rural citizens who are land buyers and customary land rights users. The TKLB supports rural elites' access to wealth and resources. It does not put in place mechanisms that holds leaders accountable to their people. The discovery of mineral wealth in the land that was once considered dry and not productive has brought about disputes where people’s peace is disrupted by big mining companies, and when people react they are suppressed and criminalized.

Racism should not be tolerated, ever. There is no excuse. Real and permanent changes must be made. Read more about the incident here: https://www.thedailyvox.co.za/racism-thrives-at-pietermaritzburg-girls-high-school-ndapwa-alweendo/

Enviroserv has been in the news a lot lately for their toxic waste landfill site, which has angered the residents of Shongweni. But Enviroserv’s crimes are not only limited to those in the current new cycle. They have been polluting in black communities, such as Ntshongweni, Dassenhoek, KwaNdengezi, Buxfarm and Cliffdale, for over 15 years and have left struggling communities with a mountain of health issues including; headaches, fatigue and nose bleeds. There is has been no science-specific research that measures the long term impacts of Enviroserv’s pollution and the health issues experienced by communities. A targeted surveillance system that maps out the social, health and environmental impacts created by hazardous waste needs to be developed to avoid far more serious health issues like cancer in the future. Enviroserv’s legal appeal process that is challenging DEA’s decision to suspend their operations license, sends a clear message that Enviroserv thinks our lives are cheap and that profit matters more to them then our health, environment and quality of life. EnviroServ is ignoring our constitutional rights and the increased incidence of illnesses apparently related to the foul odour, not to mention the psychological effects living in the stench of a toxic landfill is having on us. By refusing to tell us what is going into the landfill and what its possible toxic effects on humans are, you are only serving to increase our fear that the health effects are being caused by the hazardous, ineffectively or untreated waste being accepted at the landfill.

5 young men aged 19-30 were shot and killed in Hilton, Pietermaritzburg on the 29th of March 2017 by the K9 unit. A lot is unclear about the deaths, but the families have evidence to believe that the boys were running away from the police at the time of their shooting. The deceased had never been charged and found guilty by any court of law. Even if they were, nothing warrants or justifies the inhumane way in which the Police handled the situation. Following their gruesome murder, these young men's photos were then splashed on social media by these unthinking insensitive Police without consent or knowledge by their families thus inflicting further cruel punishment on the grieving families. The purpose of this inhumane act is not known. This is the worst form of cruelty and no family must ever be put through this again at the hands of the very people who are supposed to serve and protect them.

• To get young people to understand the plight of the underprivileged. • Young people to look at the causes that lead to others needs especially in winter. • Give young people the opportunity to give back to the underprivileged communities and homes. • Create networks to work with other organizations as part of our youth outreach programme. • Equip young people with mobilising skills. • Teach young people door to door campaigning. • Building engagement and collaboration between organisations. • Providing practical assistance and knowledge to plan and prepare for winter. • Facilitating a collaborative approach to communication across organisations; ensuring that vulnerable households receive correct, clear, consistent, useful and actionable advice and information. • This will provide the youth with effective planning skills. • This will teach the youth the art of giving without expecting anything in return.

It makes no sense to upgrade Muizenberg police station considering some poor communities urgently require more police resources, including stations. According to Statistics SA, there were 27 murders reported in Muizenberg last year, while 279 people were killed in Nyanga and another 161 in Khayelitsha during the same period. “Our argument is that more officers are deployed to areas where there is no need and this confirms our suspicion that SAPS continues to serve only white communities.” "There are more police resources deployed to areas where there is no need. This situation confirms our suspicions that SAPS continue only serve white communities." “Police must stop prioritising white and rich communities, because we know people who live in those areas have access to private security.”

As residents from Freedom Park, south of Johannesburg, we marched on 20 March 2017 to the ANC headquarters, in a bid to demand the rights to occupy vacant land on the outskirts of the area in which we live. With the ANC set to hold a policy conference in June to discuss, among other issues, how to expropriate land for the benefit of communities as tabled in its Strategy and Tactics Discussion Document, we call on you to stand in solidarity with all landless people across South Africa by supporting this campaign. “We have been living in Freedom Park as tenants for almost all our lives. None of us here owns any land. All we are asking for is for government to give us some piece of land, and we will build our own shacks.” “We are members of the ANC, and we trust it to listen to our cries. All we want is land.” We have adopted this Eleven Points Program for Freedom Park Backyard Dwellers to advance the fight for decent and habitable housing for all. 1. Occupy land and erect structures for as long as there is a backlog of decent Housing for all. 2. Resist evictions and fight not to be evicted or be moved to other places where we do not wish to live. 3. Fight for closing down of all municipal anti-land invasion units and all private eviction squads, such as the Red Ants, that municipalities outsource this function to. 4. The struggle of the Marikana occupiers in Philippi (Cape Town) is a victory for the landless people of Azania and it must be defended. The Marikana occupation and struggle in Philippi has resulted in a Constitutional Court decision that it is unlawful for anti-land 'invasion' units to knock down a structure or structures that have been built by occupiers as a home to live in, regardless of how long the structure has stood or whether there is furniture in it. 5. Occupations are a legitimate means for us to survive poverty and unemployment and speed up the process of land redistribution that the government promised but continues to fail to deliver. 6. We note that even under the so-called democratic dispensation the state continues to uphold the property rights of the rich, while the poor are expected to rot away under intolerable living conditions. 7. We reject the state's zero tolerance policy on occupations that is enforced by municipalities, the police and the courts. It is a contradiction to talk about “land reform” – as the government has again been doing recently – while at the same time denying people’s right to occupy land and punishing them if they do. 8. We note that over many decades of forced removals and pass laws the Black masses in occupied Azania, in defiance of apartheid, won the right to occupy land and build structures/shacks. This must be defended and extended in order to ensure adequate and just land redistribution for the landless Black masses dispossessed of their land through colonialism and apartheid. 9. Today, those who occupied land prior to 1994 are not threatened with eviction; while those who occupy today face the state’s harsh and repressive zero tolerance policy on occupations. We reiterate that it is a contradiction for the state to talk about land reform and yet deny people the right to occupy the land of their ancestors and birth. 10. This makes a mockery of the new democracy and effectively criminalizes our struggle for decent and habitable Housing. 11. By failing to address the housing crisis, by allowing the appalling conditions that people face daily and by failing to provide decent and habitable housing for all the state and it's functionaries are the real ‘criminals’. Those who occupy land and struggle to improve their living conditions are guilty of nothing other than pursuing the rights the Constitution and government have promised them.