The recent collapse of a mall in Centurion, where a concrete slab in a parking lot under con-struction killed a construction worker, has again alarmed the civil-engineering industry.

The mall collapse is not the first.

In 1996 the third floor of the North-park Mall collapsed.

The collapse, during construction, resulted in the death of three people and the engineer was later disqualified from membership of the Engineering Council of South Africa (Ecsa).

This was the only engineer to ever be disqualified. Almost three years ago, in November 2001, part of Pretoria’s Brooklyn Mall collapsed.

The collapse occurred in the south- west wing of the mall, where the roof collapsed, resulting in the council closing a section of the mall off, pending an investigation.

Reports at the time indicated that the Tshwane city council was investigating 15 buildings for noncompliance with safety standards.

Concerns were raised about the practice of fast-tracking, lax enforce-ment of regulations and contractors cutting corners.

Then, in December, a roof collapsed at the Kolonnade shopping centre, trap-ping fifty people.

The shopping centre had only been open for two months when the 25 m2 roof fell down on the ice-rink.

After the most recent collapse, at the Centurion Mall this month, when a section of the roof in a parking lot that was under construction collapsed, concerns have again been raised.

Concerns centre around the issue that compliance with national building regulations is being flouted by local authorities.

South African Institution of Civil Engineers president Ron Watermeyer raised some of these issues with Engineering News.

Among other issues of concern are questions of whether engineers place commercial gain over public safety.

This raises the question of whether South African buildings are safe, and adequately protect the public.

According to the National Building Regulations and Building Standards Act, buildings must be erected with the prior written consent of the local authority. The local authority must then appoint officers to issue occupancy cer- tificates, without which a building can-not be occupied.

"At face value, the Act has the potential to deliver safe buildings to South African citizens." Regulations in the Act give power to either the engineer or another person appointed by the local authority to certify work as safe.

"It is implied that a registered person will abide by Ecsa’s code of conduct and thereby place public safety above all else." This means that those appointed are expected to not take part in any endeavour that they are not competent to complete. "Ecsa is mandated by the legislation with disciplining transgressors of this code. It has, however, only once de-registered an engineer for an offence re- lating to public safety since its incep-tion, although other disciplinary actions and investigations are conducted on a regular basis." Watermeyer points out that the case took four years to conclude due to the arduous legal process required. He argues that the current model is not effective enough to ensure the safety of buildings in South Africa.

"I would venture to suggest that South Africa’s buildings are only as safe as is the competence and integrity of the engineers entrusted to certify compliance with the national building regulations." Consequently, he suggests that the certification process be overhauled and more stringent measures put into place to ensure that engineers are appropriately qualified to carry out tasks.

"In South Africa, the tendency has been to confuse competence with pro-fessional registration.

"Professional registration is intended to manage integrity and to recognise the attainment of minimum standards of education and training and an ability to work independently.

"It does not assess competence to verify that a building complies with performance-based building regulations."