Michelle Pretorius cares for her 6-month-old daughter, 28 July 2021, in their room at the Village 2.0 Women's Shelter in Bosmont. Allegations have been made that the centre is being poorly managed, which the management refute. Picture: Michel Bega
“How can we be the bad guys?” asks an agitated Francis van Heerden, founder of a care centre for abuse survivors and victims of gender-based crimes in Bosmont, Johannesburg, over allegations that their facility is nothing more than a haven for drug users to squat in.
This video is no longer available.
The shelter for abused women and children paints a grim picture of a community in crisis, following allegations of rampant drug use by staff members and residents. This as community outreach programs nationwide experience increasing pressure and demand for service at a time when resources are scant.
It all began with a community activist couple who swooped in to help dozens of abused women and children in Bosmont by leasing a building owned by a local church.
Since then, however, it has culminated in an investigation by the Gauteng government into what exactly this supposed place of safety for women and children is really about, with members of the Bosmont Methodist Church believing the institution was duped into a deal that turned out to be a scam to get money and a free place to stay and do drugs for van Heerden and her family. They fear that government help may come too late to save the lives and livelihoods of the suburb’s most vulnerable residents, in the centre now known as Village 2.0, in Maraisburg road
The Department of Social Development, which has visited the facility at least once before, is investigating allegations questioning the legitimacy of the centre and multiple violations against its residents.
Some of the complaints are contained in letter sent to The Citizen by a resident of the building who was allowed to move into the GBV centre despite being a man and not a victim of violence or abuse.
Community members started asking questions when the shelter failed to make its first rent payment on time.
According to church leader Gus Malgas, Village 2.0 has only paid the church around R40 000, which is only one month’s rent, since moving in. The director and founder of the centre, Francis van Heerden and her boyfriend, Bryan Maiden moved into the facility over four months ago, after coming to an agreement to take over from the previous tenants who were running a student accommodation facility.
According to Maiden, the couple made an initial investment of R200 000, which went into establishing the centre. Despite this, the pair have only managed to pay one month’s rent and have struggled to provide enough food and other basic essentials. Cash donations received from various sources have so far amounted to R5000, Maiden says.
Residents of the facility range from young mothers suffering drug addiction and mental illness to older women, displaced by impossible living situations, and children as young as six months old.
After months of asking questions with no sufficient answers, Malgas suspects that the entire operation was set up to cover up some shady dealing and rampant drug abuse on the part of van Heerden and her partners.
Another community leader Dean Henry says he reported the centre to the department after residents at the centre made concerning allegations about van Heerden and other staff members.
“My concern I raised was that we had men living on the premises and Francis assured us that all the men living on the premises (were) mandated by DSD. I contacted DSD and was told they issued no such mandate. That is when I raised my concerns with DSD and fellow community parties that Francis and Village 2.0 was not registered to operate .
“This was down as a concern for the ladies and children on the premises. We as a community are concerned as there where many incidents that happened on the premises and are still happening.”
By van Heerden’s own admission and according to church members, the center owes the Bosmont Methodist Church tens of thousands in rent, including back-payments emanating from the previous tenants as part of the deal which led to the opening of Village 2.0.
Over two dozen women and their children were admitted into the facility over the last few months, including those referred by members of the church. This is despite the fact that the centre is yet to be registered under the Department of Social Development and does not have the necessary certification to operate.
Armed with just a registered NPO (non-profit organisation) number, van Heerden was able to convince the church to allow her, her partner, son and friends move into the building and start welcoming victims of domestic violence and other traumatic situations into the facility.
Currently only 15 victims including children live on the facility, according to van Heerden.
Jason* moved into Village 2.0 with his wife Sheree earlier this year after being desperate for a place to stay, even agreeing to pay rent.
He claims he has stayed at the facility for the past three months after realising that its managers needed his help. Despite numerous donations sourced from social media and the community, the home did not have enough food and electricity to serve its 30 residents on a daily basis.
He began sourcing donations via social media and became heavily involved in the day-to-day running of the centre, until he fell out with management over alleged drug use and other illegal activity he claims continues to happen at the facility.
Van Heerden and Maiden have both vehemently denied the allegations against them, with Van Heerden insisting that she has been “clean” for more than a year.
DA shadow MEC for social Development Refiloe Ntsheke says illegally harbouring addicts without going through the proper channels is potentially dangerous as well as being illegal.
“Unregistered drug rehab facilities are actually illegal- rehabs have a big duty of detoxification of clients and part of their treatment- this is a medical procedure and requires medical personnel. In some cases, clients are then given meds to help them not to have substance craving, also requiring medical personnel supervision,” she said.
Her concerns are shared by the Gauteng MEC for Social Development Morakane Mosupyoe, who said it is “saddening that women, children, families and everyone in need of social support tend to find themselves in unregistered, illegal facilities.”
In response to The Citizen’s questions about the status of the centre, she urged communities to ensure they take those in need of assistance to registered facilities, and noted that there has been an increased need for shelters for the homeless and destitute since the start of the country’s lockdown more than a year ago.
Mosupyoe said the department is aware of the Village 2.0, which she confirmed is operating illegally.
Officials will be paying the shelter a visit on Thursday 12 August, during which they will “assess the conditions and beneficiaries in the shelter” and issue a notice of closure. She said the department will ensure the current residents are placed in registered facilities.
Download our app and read this and other great stories on the move. Available for Android and iOS.
