The International Peace College South Africa has been accused of illegally occupying part of a refurbished building in Cape Town after failing to submit building plans and appoint an engineer to oversee construction of the revamp project. Photos: Supplied
The International Peace College South Africa (IPSA) has been accused of illegally occupying part of a refurbished building in Cape Town after failing to submit building plans and appoint an engineer to oversee construction of the revamp project.
Whistleblower Salma Moosa, an interior architect who previously worked on the project in Rylands, told the Mail & Guardian about her year-long battle to get the City of Cape Town authorities to confront the matter.
The IPSA has vehemently denied the allegations as “unsubstantiated, defamatory, and malicious”. The City of Cape Town has confirmed that construction work went ahead on the project without complying with building regulations.
Moosa said she had sent emails to the city, including to mayor Geordin Hill-Lewis, the office of the city ombudsman and the fire department in November 2024 but had not received a response to her complaint about the failure to submit building plans for months, apart from being told that the city’s legal department was awaiting a court date.
In the meantime, she noticed that the building had been occupied.
In her letter to Hill-Lewis, Moosa alleged that construction had continued on the site despite the city having issued a stop work notice to the IPSA on 18 April 2024.
“Despite my insistence that a structural engineer be appointed, the client refused to do so. I even went as far as bringing a structural engineer to site to evaluate the work … [The] municipality will be held accountable if the structure fails and there is a loss of life, as I have raised these concerns with the relative building inspectors for the area via telephone,” Moosa wrote.
“I am concerned about the safety of the students as it is a public building, and it is currently being used.”
Moosa alleged building works proceeded with no professional engineer being appointed, no structural design plans, no sign-off of construction work and no architectural building plans were submitted or approved for the building works.
“The subcontractor did not follow any of the construction regulations for establishment of the site,” she alleged. “The building is currently being utilised for teaching despite no occupational certificate issued.”
Moosa said she eventually received a letter from the city’s ombudsman on 15 May advising that the office was in the process of “registering and assessing the matter” but this was only after the M&G had prodded the city regarding her complaint.
She said she felt it was her moral duty to blow the whistle on the non-compliance with the building regulations.
Cape Town’s deputy mayor and mayoral committee member for spatial planning and environment, Eddie Andrews, confirmed Moosa’s fears in his response to the M&G’s questions regarding the status quo of the development.
“The work done contravenes section 4(1) read with section 4(4) of the National Building Regulations and Building Standards Act No 103 of 1977. The owners started with building on site prior to obtaining written approval from the local authority for such work,” Andrews said.
“No building plan applications have been submitted to date, hence the matter is referred to the city’s legal services department.”
He added that it followed that “no occupancy certificate has been issued, as no building plan has been approved”.
Asked why the city had not forced the developer and the IPSA to comply with its stop work notice, Andrews said it was taking legal steps to enforce compliance.
“Due to non-compliance with the notices served on the registered owners, the matter was referred to the city’s legal services department for prosecution/further processing to the municipal court,” he said.
“We are awaiting feedback from the processing office at legal services to determine where in the process the matter is. At this stage the matter is still being investigated by the city’s legal services department.”
Moosa said she had dealt with IPSA representative Nazier Osman regarding the project’s construction work and interior design.
Osman referred the M&G’s request for comment to the college’s attorney, Edwin Petersen, who, acting for Osman and the IPSA,demanded that the M&G retract the story and threatened legal action.
Petersen said the allegations were “unsubstantiated, defamatory, and malicious”.
“These claims are categorically denied in their entirety and are unequivocally rejected as false, reckless, and engineered to tarnish the reputation of both our client and the institution.”
He said the allegations regarding the illegal building activity were “devoid of truth” and “constitute a deliberate campaign to damage IPSA’s standing as a respected educational institution”.
“The insinuation that IPSA or Mr Nazier Osman engaged in unlawful construction practices is rejected. IPSA has consistently acted in good faith and is cooperating fully with the City of Cape Town’s inquiries. Any suggestion [of] … non-compliance or negligence is vehemently denied. We are currently reviewing the matter, and a comprehensive response will be furnished in due course.”
He said the company would submit its detailed response to the allegations by 16 May, but had not responded to the M&G’s follow-up email requesting this further comment by the time of publication.
Discussion about this post