Abstract The by-laws of South African municipalities are full of provisions criminalising the poor. For example, begging and sleeping in the open is prohibited in many cities. Hawking goods or providing services is restricted. Many of these by-laws are rarely enforced while others are enforced to provide a sense of security among the privileged by removing undesirable persons from the streets. Action against the poor is often presented as being taken in their interest; the homeless should live in shelters, beggars should find employment. But it is through the action against them that many lose their livelihood and what little they own. Clearly more could be done to assist the vulnerable. However, criminalisation is not a solution. The paper traces the colonial history of vagrancy laws and their relationship to by-laws criminalising outside living and survival strategies of poor persons in the four largest metropolitan areas in South Africa: Johannesburg, Tshwane (Pretoria), eThekwini (Durban) and Cape Town. It shows how vagrancy legislation and related by-laws have been, and are being, used for social control of the poor, who have throughout history been viewed as a threat to the elite. The article further explores the constitutionality of anti-poor by-laws and the prospects of a constitutional challenge before the courts.

中文翻译：

---

通过市政附则将无家可归者和生存策略定为犯罪：殖民遗产和合宪性

摘要 南非市政当局的章程充满了将穷人定罪的条款。例如，许多城市禁止乞讨和露宿。贩卖商品或提供服务受到限制。许多这些附则很少得到执行，而其他附则的执行是为了通过将不受欢迎的人从街上赶走来为特权阶层提供安全感。针对穷人的行动常常被认为是为了他们的利益；无家可归者应该住在收容所，乞丐应该找到工作。但正是通过对他们采取的行动，许多人失去了生计和他们所拥有的一点点。显然，可以做更多的工作来帮助弱势群体。然而，刑事定罪不是解决办法。该论文追溯了流浪法的殖民历史及其与将南非四个最大都市区（约翰内斯堡、茨瓦内（比勒陀利亚）、eThekwini（德班）和开普敦）的穷人的户外生活和生存策略定为刑事犯罪的附则之间的关系。它展示了流浪立法和相关附则如何被用于对穷人的社会控制，而穷人在历史上一直被视为对精英的威胁。本文进一步探讨了反贫困附则的合宪性以及在法庭上提出宪法挑战的前景。用于对穷人进行社会控制，穷人在历史上一直被视为对精英的威胁。本文进一步探讨了反贫困附则的合宪性以及在法庭上提出宪法挑战的前景。用于对穷人进行社会控制，穷人在历史上一直被视为对精英的威胁。本文进一步探讨了反贫困附则的合宪性以及在法庭上提出宪法挑战的前景。