comments2

2025-03-19 11:39:30 +02:00

Beyers

No I do not

Other

The Criminal Procedure Act and other legislation allows the South African Police Services to gain access to footage in a lawful manner by having for example a warrant officer visit the premises and obtaining the video footage from the person in charge. This bylaw cannot introduce new processes that complicate or delay such operations etc. A citizen does not require permission to monitor the front or back of their home or business as long as it does not impede on other’s right to privacy. This bylaw is unnecessary and will cause problems as it does not make logical or legal sense, nor will it ensure anything special to occur other than waste time and resources.

2025-03-19 11:30:45 +02:00

Shirley

No I do not

Other

I object to this bylaw in its entirety. The purpose gives no benefit to the general public and rate payers. The need to register and pay registration fees is going to add an administrative burden costs of which will just be passed to ratepayers - both from the Council and from businesses, institutions and landlords who now have extra cost. The need for private CCTV to meet City requirements is ridiculous and again, will add cost. It is also likely to be abused in order to benefit certain product and service providers and is likley to lead to graft and corruption. The city of Johannesburg cannot even maintain and police the bylaws they have nor maintain the city so they will NOT be able to police this. Only the law abiding will be punished and those who commit crimes will get away it. This bylaw was promulgated without consultation with ratepayers, community policing organisations, the SAP or private security and SHOULD NOT be allowed to be passed. Adding cost to premises in Joburg will encourage developers to move to neighboring municipal areas without this nonsense bylaw.

2025-03-19 11:11:22 +02:00

Neil

No I do not

Chapter 1 — Interpretation and application

Welcome to South Africa, where criminals have more rights than the citizens. What's next, will locks be banned?

2025-03-19 09:08:23 +02:00

Bruce

No I do not

Chapter 1 — Interpretation and application

This is an abuse of power, the state should not be able to control this.
Community security and support is necessary because the state does not adequately protect us against rampant crime

2025-03-18 19:13:07 +02:00

Leon

No I do not

Chapter 1 — Interpretation and application

2025-03-18 18:23:14 +02:00

Jarod

No I do not

Chapter 1 — Interpretation and application

2025-03-18 15:56:43 +02:00

Andrew

No I do not

Chapter 1 — Interpretation and application

2025-03-18 15:38:28 +02:00

Roelf

No I do not

Other

Private Citizens already live in fear of criminals in Johannesburg, and now the City wants to remove one of the simplest defensive mechanisms from it's citizens.

The sharing of video footage is protected under our freedom of speech and expression in South Africa and attempting to regulate that is simply another overreach of civil liberties.

Grow up! Police more!

2025-03-18 13:25:23 +02:00

Pieter

No I do not

Chapter 3 — Exemptions and prohibitions

The bylaw's prohibition on unauthorized use of drone cameras is too restrictive, failing to account for legitimate uses such as journalism or recreation. The city should establish clear guidelines or a permitting process for drone camera use in specific circumstances rather than a blanket prohibition. Additionally, the special approval requirements for certain city properties may be unnecessary and add an extra layer of bureaucracy without clear justification.
Section 7.2 prohibits unauthorized drone camera use, and section 7.3 allows the city to determine special circumstances for temporary permits, but this is too discretionary, as noted in Johannesburg introduces new by-law for CCTV surveillance regulation. This could hinder innovation and legitimate uses, especially as drone technology becomes more common.

2025-03-18 12:02:00 +02:00

Mike

Yes I do

No concern

Crime prevention and prosecution is critical.

2025-03-18 09:31:01 +02:00

Nicholas

Yes I do

No concern

I think this is a great idea. I had a robbery the other day where they came in from a university building next door to my property. The university refused to give footage of the robbery that they had via their cameras that would have drastically helped the police. The University sighted the Popi Act as their refusal. This should not be allowed.

2025-03-18 08:42:51 +02:00

Michael

No I do not

Other

This is a tyrannical affront to privacy. Assuming you can claim ownership of data that I may or may not have, that I may or may not have captured using cameras I bought, installed, maintain, and own, is an absurd imposition on my privacy that could only have been dreamed up by someone completely ignorant of human rights. I have the right to privacy, and that includes privacy of documentation, videos, and whatever spins around on my disk inside my surveillance systems, my computer, phone, and car cam captures. Those are mine, I pay for it, it is for my use and my protection. You, the government and the police have no right to access my data without my consent, and I do not give it. I will support legitimate request for data in the event that I have evidence useful to a police investigation, but dont dream of claiming ownership and power over my information that I collect, keep, capture, and maintain. You will probably tell me I cant show it to others after you claim ownership, right? Your fantasies of the power over the people needs to be corrected, you should be straining for the opportunity to serve we the people instead of your self enrichment. Go make the traffic lights work, or work to
keep water in the taps, or arrest some criminals, or disband some mafias, turn in your corrupt thieving work companions.

2025-03-18 06:52:27 +02:00

Anke

No I do not

Other

2025-03-18 06:32:49 +02:00

Madeli

No I do not

Chapter 1 — Interpretation and application

2025-03-17 18:12:28 +02:00

Bruce

No I do not

Chapter 8 — Provisions relating to residential and private property

Invasion of privacy, nevermind the incredible governmental overreach. I don't trust that the ANC has my best interests at heart and that goes double for cities controlled by them. This law WILL be abused