Amazon’s Cape Town campus gets green light

The construction of Amazon’s planned offices in Cape Town should be allowed to go ahead, according to a court ruling, in a setback for the indigenous people attempting to stop the development.  

The ruling from the Western Cape High Court said those opposing the project could not “demonstrate the right to heritage is at risk of suffering any harm”, adding the cultural value of the site is undisputed.

“On the contrary, the papers indicated the development might enhance the land’s resources, having regard to the degraded state of the site when the authorisations were granted.”

Liesbeek Leisure Properties Trust is developing the site Amazon was planning to use as a flagship office in Africa, consolidating its employees in the city and hosting new hires for its expanding operations.

Amazon has been expanding on the continent by building data centres and opening additional offices in Johannesburg and Lagos, Nigeria. 

Africa has a fast-growing, young and tech-savvy population that makes it an attractive market, though problems including spotty internet and power access in many countries have historically limited growth.

The numbers of skilled workers and the infrastructure in South Africa, the most developed economy on the continent, has made it an attractive destination for international tech companies looking to expand, including Alphabet’s Google and Microsoft. 

The current battles over the Liesbeek site have resulted in project delays for the developer and the company. 

The judgment is a “major win for all Capetonians who stand to benefit from the R4.6bn project,” Liesbeek Leisure Properties Trust said on Tuesday.

The court also said the original judgment in March — where a judge ordered the development to stop while it reviewed whether first nations peoples were appropriately consulted — was induced by fraud. 

It said the respondent misrepresented information relating to the Goringhaicona Khoi Khoin constitution, and did not have the authorisation to start the proceedings that culminated in the original judgment.

He further misrepresented the views of some indigenous leaders without consulting them, it said. 

The judgment was awarded with costs for the appellants.  

More stories like this are available on bloomberg.com