The Organisation Undoing Tax Abuse (Outa) on Monday urged the City of Johannesburg (CoJ) to overturn its new by-law on privately owned closed-circuit television (CCTV) cameras, describing it as unworkable, convoluted and irrational and arguing that it places unreasonable burdens on private businesses and residents, while it raises privacy concerns.

The organisation is going to court to challenge the legality of the CoJ’s new by-law, which sets up convoluted rules requiring registration and City access to private data.

Outa’s case, against the CoJ, and the City’s municipal manager and mayor, was filed in the Johannesburg High Court on 18 June.

The papers have been served, and Outa is awaiting an indication of whether the City intends to oppose the action.

Outa also wants the City to provide records relating to the public participation process, adoption and promulgation of the by-law.

The by-law was passed by the City council in February 2025, with the meeting minutes showing support from 15 parties, including the African National Congress, ActionSA, Economic Freedom Fighters and Patriotic Alliance, and dissent by two parties, the Democratic Alliance and the African Christian Democratic Party.

Outa executive director for accountability division Advocate Stefanie Fick explained that the by-laws conflict with section 156 of the Constitution regarding the powers of municipalities, also pointing to lack of rationality.

The organisation questioned the legality of the by-law, arguing that the City’s powers are limited by the Constitution and the South African Police Services Act, saying these do not appear to allow a municipality to exercise direct authority over private property such as privately owned CCTV cameras.

“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,” said Fick.

She said this would infringe the constitutional rights to property, privacy and freedom and security. She added that the public participation process was essential and called for the by-law to be declared invalid “for want of sufficient public participation”.

“It would appear that the CoJ is usurping policing functions by commandeering private CCTV camera systems aimed at ensuring the safety and security of individuals, communities and property within the City, which safety and security responsibility is primarily the function of national and provincial government. For this reason, the CoJ is overstepping its executive and legislative authority,” Fick explained.

She highlighted that the by-law requires “prior written approval” from the City for installing, using or upgrading CCTV cameras which include coverage of public space, to provide the City with plans and motivations for such cameras, get sign-off from a registered engineer, reapply each year, and pay fees to the City.

It also allows the City to confiscate, without a court order, any equipment it deems to have overstepped the by-law.

The by-law also requires that each CCTV camera must record and store data for a minimum period, but this is incoherently stated and effectively outlaws cameras that provide only real-time monitoring.

Fick noted that the by-law further blocks sharing of data with community policing forums or private security companies, restricting it to use by the South African Police Service and Johannesburg Metro Police Department only.

Outa wants CCTV cameras to carry labels with owners’ names and contact details, which creates privacy issues.

Fick called the demand for fees “nothing more than a scheme to secure additional revenue for the CoJ", which she said was "financially crippled”, and a double tax for owners who have already paid VAT and probably import duties on their CCTV equipment.

Outa believes the by-law will undermine community safety initiatives, “which means the by-law will effectively have the opposite effect of what is intended”.

Fick explained that threats to confiscate unregistered cameras, or those of which the City does not approve, would be arbitrary deprivation or expropriation without compensation.