By Princess Eugene Majuru
The City of Harare has reportedly issued a 14-day ultimatum to property owners who constructed buildings without the necessary approvals, ordering them to pay fines, submit building plans and regularise their properties or face demolition at their own expense.
The reported directive has raised serious concerns about whether the municipality is taking sufficient account of Zimbabwe’s economic difficulties, the administrative processes involved in obtaining building approvals and the devastating consequences of demolishing people’s homes.
While the City of Harare has a responsibility to enforce building regulations and maintain orderly urban development, enforcement must be balanced against fairness, affordability and the fundamental need for shelter.
Fourteen days to regularise a property is an extremely demanding deadline, particularly when compliance requires money, professional assistance and approval from the very authorities issuing the ultimatum.
A house is not something built overnight
Building a home in Zimbabwe is often the culmination of years of sacrifice. Families save money, borrow from relatives, sell possessions and sometimes rely on financial assistance from family members working abroad to put a roof over their heads.
For many Zimbabweans, owning a house represents their entire life’s investment.
The threat of demolishing such properties within a short period raises difficult questions about proportionality, due process and the responsibilities of local authorities towards residents.
How does the City of Harare realistically expect homeowners to raise money for fines, engage architects or other qualified professionals, prepare building plans, submit documentation and navigate municipal approval procedures within just 14 days?
Even homeowners with the financial means to comply may find themselves dependent on administrative processes beyond their control.
The council should explain how long its own departments ordinarily take to examine and approve building plans before imposing deadlines on residents.
The council must acknowledge Zimbabwe’s economic difficulties
Zimbabweans are already facing considerable financial pressures. Many households are struggling with the costs of food, education, transport, healthcare and everyday survival.
Against this background, requiring homeowners to find additional money for fines and professional building plans within two weeks risks placing compliance beyond the reach of many affected families.
The municipality must recognise the difference between a homeowner who deliberately disregards building regulations and a family that may have been misled by land sellers, developers or individuals claiming to have authority to allocate residential stands.
There are also important questions about the role of land barons, fraudulent land transactions and failures in urban planning.
Where properties were built on land sold through irregular arrangements, authorities should investigate those responsible for the transactions rather than placing the entire burden on homeowners without examining how the situation arose.
Demolition should not be the first solution
Demolition is one of the most serious enforcement measures available to a local authority. It can destroy household assets, displace families and leave children, elderly people and vulnerable residents without accommodation.
There are circumstances where buildings present immediate safety risks, obstruct essential infrastructure or occupy environmentally protected land. Such cases require appropriate assessment and lawful intervention.
However, a distinction should be made between structures that genuinely cannot be regularised and homes that could meet planning requirements through corrective work, documentation or other reasonable measures.
A building without approved plans is not necessarily a building that must be demolished.
The City of Harare should establish a transparent assessment process that identifies which properties can be regularised, which require modifications and which present serious obstacles to lawful occupation.
What the City of Harare should consider instead
Rather than relying on a blanket 14-day ultimatum, the municipality could introduce a more practical regularisation programme.
An initial period of at least 90 days would give affected homeowners more time to obtain professional advice, assemble documents, arrange finances and begin the application process.
For more complicated cases, a six-month compliance programme could allow residents to work with municipal officials towards resolving outstanding planning issues.
The council could also introduce affordable payment plans for eligible homeowners, establish dedicated regularisation offices, publish clear building-plan requirements and provide written explanations for decisions affecting individual properties.
Crucially, homeowners who have submitted complete applications should not face demolition simply because municipal officials have not finished processing their paperwork, provided there is no immediate safety danger or other overriding legal requirement.
Residents should also have access to an accessible review or appeal process before irreversible action is taken.
Where was the council when these buildings were being constructed?
Another important question concerns the municipality’s own oversight responsibilities.
Houses do not appear overnight. Construction generally takes weeks, months or even years.
Where unauthorised developments have expanded across residential areas, it is reasonable to ask what inspections were undertaken, whether warnings were issued during construction and what action was taken against those responsible for illegal land allocations.
The council should disclose what measures it has taken to prevent unauthorised development before buildings reach completion.
Enforcement directed only at the final homeowner, without examining earlier failures in the planning and land administration system, risks leaving the underlying problems unresolved.
Development control must go hand in hand with accountability
Harare needs proper urban planning, safe buildings, functioning drainage systems, protected wetlands, accessible roads and reliable public infrastructure.
These are legitimate public interests that building regulations are intended to protect.
But successful urban management requires more than issuing ultimatums. It requires consistent inspections, accessible approval procedures, transparent land administration and cooperation between municipal authorities and residents.
Where buildings can be brought into compliance safely and lawfully, regularisation offers an opportunity to improve planning records, strengthen municipal revenue collection and preserve existing housing.
Where demolition is unavoidable, decisions should follow the applicable law, individual assessment and appropriate procedural safeguards.
Harare needs solutions, not another housing crisis
The central question is not whether the City of Harare has the authority to enforce building regulations. It is how that authority should be exercised in a city where housing insecurity and financial hardship are already serious concerns.
A 14-day deadline may create urgency, but it does not necessarily create the financial resources, technical capacity or administrative efficiency needed for successful compliance.
The municipality should clarify the legal basis of its directive, explain the categories of buildings affected, publish the applicable fines and provide a realistic procedure for homeowners seeking to regularise their properties.
It should also consider extending the deadline and suspending demolition action against eligible properties while properly submitted regularisation applications are assessed. Harare cannot address failures in urban planning simply by threatening to destroy the investments of residents who may have spent decades trying to secure a home.
The city needs an approach that combines lawful enforcement with compassion, transparency and practical solutions.
Protecting urban planning standards and protecting residents from unnecessary homelessness should not be treated as competing objectives.
They are both responsibilities of a city administration that serves its people. The City of Harare
Comments
About Author
