ACHPR African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights Human Rights our Collective Responsibility must uphold the rule of law that prevents the illegal occupation of law. Added to that, the Respondent argued, is the Jbligation of the Municipality to ensure that expenditure is incurred in accordance with the Municipal Finance Management Act, which ensures the fisdal responsibility of municipalities. 124. The Respondent State submitted that as part of its responsibility to make adequate and safe housing available t9 the applicant, the Municipality has to conduct a number of studies on the pr~perty under consideration, including a feasibility study, a technical survey, a domolite stability investigation, and an environmental impact study.26 ,l}:Jt ',,,,i;\, 125. The Respondent State submitted that]I if tAe;;'1;yIunici:p~lity were to simply 1>,,,, purchase the property or any other prol1'erty"tor''t > matt~f without complying '1,.+,." ..:.'-),:.. ~/_~:.: :!id::dne:::::Ju] le!~:~~~tu~:r~?~~!~:<~f ~»i~;1u!n~: Management ~~t, ,:"hich CO~ ..I.d... ,.,.;, .i•.. " .. ,h.'.~V~"'.~,,.s . ..er~o. u.s.fJegal "'c~~~..e.\ .quences for the government officials involved Il'Je:Judmgc~.Tmma.~.prosecutib .. «fr;~~z!:!~;:!'i:_': '.' , :, .... " 126. The Respondent State submitted "tq~t:,SlDuth 'A:f:ritanlaw aims at implementing section 26 of the Co~t~fution in a\~~i!~nced>In~))rer, the property rights of landowners, the rights-o' , ,<:;cupiers",,~p~~i,~t~ally of'~liln;~'rablegroups, as well as the rights and obJig~tipns 0 '" , '"fueht -wi,l;:' egar!~,tohousing.s? <!:.~'> .. - ,'- .'~\ '> , _ ,,::,';_r;::l:~_;fJY 127. The Respondent State submittecftplit in impl~¥~nting its obligation to provide housing, the .Complainants were:"'Il.l§>,ved onto the Property as an emergency measure follQ:w~nga flood in th~''':~'!i>" .;;:where they were living. However, following an apPli.cation for eviction e Complainants from the Property by the-lawful own~r$;\:tl:teIDM Trus~/}he ~unicipality has been and is still in the prdc"~~s-:otprovidiitg.ap:prppriate hbusink for the Complainants." x \j!"~t.;~~~;~:?,>, a, =: ":'j~':'~ 128. The R~s.p~it-a~~tj';',$tate submitted that the Municipality has provided basic services' :'to th,~;tCorupl~hl,ants in response to the High Court's judgment. The Government" argued"/{1;ldfit has been dJtermined that the Municipality cannot purchase ttt§, PropertY as it is not sUiiable for habitation. The Government, however, clcilwed that it has identified JIternative land for development and is in the proces~;;5rfinalising the last legis~ative requirements before construction of houses can commence. The Respondent State added that the Complainants I I _ First Submission on Merits on behalf of the Republic [ofSouth Africa, para 5.25. ~ 27 Citing the Extension of the Security of Tenure Act ~2 of 1997; Prevention of IJJ.,~P~~~ti,Q,J4)fi ~~ and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act 19 of 1998; Housing Act 108 0~~99J;,~~.elQ men~~ Facilitation Act 67 of 1995; National Environ lental Act 107 of 1998;.i'"MUniciPt.cl~. ~in c! ~ \\~ .. Management Act 56 of 2003.. , ;' ,~:(;·'qr:J c Gi 28 First Submission on Merits on behalf of the Republic of South Africa, paras 5.29-.5~\. ',,,"", . 26 :, q \,. ..~ p,u-UA /gJ=i (? (/) ~ Q /1 ~ :&r:«g,"~!j\'fi~."~I' ~~~ .""",