The CCTV bylaw, adopted on 21 February 2025 and repealed on 2 September 2025, imposed strict requirements on privately owned CCTV systems. OUTA and SAPOA launched legal challenges, arguing that the bylaw was unconstitutional and unworkable. With its repeal, OUTA did not proceed with the main application but intends to seek costs due to the City’s delayed reversal. OUTA is awaiting a taxation date from court.

The bylaw required property owners and businesses to register CCTV systems, pay annual fees, submit technical plans, obtain engineer approval, and grant the City access to footage while limiting owners’ ability to share it. These provisions were widely criticised as intrusive, irrational, and counterproductive to community safety efforts.​

OUTA maintained that the bylaw infringed several constitutional rights, including privacy and property rights and exceeded municipal powers. The bylaw was further criticised as irrational and unimplementable, placing disproportionate obligations on residents.

As such, OUTA launched a formal Review Application on 27 June 2025.

In addition to its legal challenge, OUTA lodged a formal complaint against the bylaw following its publication in the Provincial Government Gazette on 28 February 2025. The complaint emphasised that the City failed to meet constitutional and statutory obligations for meaningful public participation:

OUTA argued that proper participation should include:

• Adequate and accessible public notice across multiple platforms;

• Availability of the full draft bylaw for review;

• Reasonable timeframes (typically at least 30 days) for comment;

• Public hearings and opportunities for direct engagement;

• Genuine consideration and publication of public input.

However, it was found that the City’s process was insufficient and flawed:

• Notices were reportedly limited to the Government Gazette, with little evidence of broader public communication;

• A purported notice dated 6 November 2024 could not be located despite diligent efforts;

• Even if published, reliance on limited notices was deemed inadequate for a bylaw with significant societal impact.

OUTA concluded that the process failed to meet the standard of “meaningful participation” as required by constitutional jurisprudence, which demands active facilitation and genuine consideration of public input.

 ​

OUTA criticised the bylaw as a misguided attempt to extract revenue rather than improve public safety, questioning the rationale behind its adoption. It was emphasised that municipalities should prioritise service delivery challenges, such as infrastructure decay, water supply issues, traffic light failures and potholes, over burdensome and impractical regulations.

The repeal of the CCTV bylaw underscores the critical role of civil society in holding government accountable. It highlights the importance of lawful, rational, and participatory governance processes and it reinforces that public participation is not a procedural formality but a substantive requirement for legitimate law-making.