Battle over the government’s plan to control privately-owned CCTV cameras
The Organisation Undoing Tax Abuse (OUTA) is taking the City of Johannesburg to court over its controversial new by-law regulating privately owned CCTV cameras.
OUTA is challenging the constitutionality of the by-law, arguing that it imposes excessive burdens on residents and businesses, violates constitutional rights, and undermines safety in the city rather than improve it.
OUTA filed the legal papers in the Johannesburg High Court on 18 June 2025. They are directed at the City of Johannesburg, its municipal manager, Tshepo Makola, and its mayor, Dada Morero.
OUTA wants the by-law declared invalid and unconstitutional, and has also requested access to all records relating to the public participation process and adoption of the by-law. According to OUTA, the city has yet to confirm whether it will oppose the legal action.
The by-law in question was passed by the Johannesburg council on 21 February 2025, with support from 15 political parties, including the ANC, EFF, ActionSA and the Patriotic Alliance.
Only the Democratic Alliance and the ACDP voted against it. The by-law outlines a set of rules for installing, registering, and operating CCTV cameras that overlook public spaces, even when these cameras are located on private property.
Stefanie Fick, Executive Director of OUTA’s Accountability Division, said the by-law is riddled with legal and practical problems.
“Given the extent and impact of the by-law, it appears that limited public participation took place, alternatively, that there was insufficient community participation,” said Fick.
She argued that the lack of adequate public input alone should render the by-law invalid and that the city has overstepped its constitutional authority.
“The COJ may regulate its own CCTV camera systems as it deems fit, but it exceeds its powers by directly interfering with private property rights,” she said.
In her view, the by-law amounts to an unlawful attempt by the municipality to take over policing functions that fall under national and provincial jurisdiction.
“The city is usurping policing functions by commandeering private CCTV camera systems to ensure safety and security, a responsibility that lies with SAPS and provincial government.”
New laws irrational, cumbersome and unimplementable
According to OUTA, the by-law is not only legally questionable but also unworkable. It requires residents and businesses to seek prior written approval from the city to install, use, or even upgrade a CCTV camera that captures any public space.
Applicants must provide camera plans and written motivations, get sign-off from a registered engineer, reapply each year, and pay various fees. Fick said this process is irrational, cumbersome and unimplementable.
OUTA is also concerned about the implications for privacy. The by-law demands that CCTV cameras be clearly labelled with the owner’s name and contact details, and that all recorded footage be stored for an undefined period.
Real-time-only cameras provide no stored data and are effectively outlawed under the new rules.
The law also prevents CCTV owners from sharing footage with private security or community policing forums, restricting access solely to the SAPS and Johannesburg Metro Police Department.
The city also grants itself authority to confiscate camera equipment without a court order if it deems the cameras non-compliant, something Fick said amounts to arbitrary deprivation or expropriation without compensation.
“The exercise of public power must be rational and logically connected to the intended purpose,” she explained.
“There is no rationality between the purpose of improving safety and the unreasonable burdens imposed on a CCTV owner.”
She added that legal mechanisms, such as subpoenas, allow law enforcement to access footage when needed, without resorting to blanket surveillance.
“Far less intrusive alternatives already exist. The requirement that owners must simply hand over all data is unnecessary,” Fick said.
According to OUTA, the by-law could have the unintended effect of making Johannesburg less safe.
It also argued that if residents are discouraged from installing CCTV systems due to red tape, surveillance coverage will decline, leaving communities more vulnerable to crime.
“The net result would be a community increasingly exposed to crime, where the SAPS and JMPD are not equipped to effectively deal with the scourge of pervasive crime,” warned Fick.
She also questioned the financial motives behind the new rules. “The fees imposed are nothing more than a scheme to secure additional revenue for the COJ, which is financially crippled,” she said.
Fick called it a form of double taxation on residents who have already paid VAT and possibly import duties on their security equipment.
OUTA maintains that the by-law is not only a threat to privacy and property rights, but also a step backwards in the fight against crime.
Loading ...