Expropriation of land a step closer

Opposition parties slam recommendation

LAND expropriation without compensation moved another step closer to becoming a reality after the National Assembly adopted a report recommending that section 25 of the Constitution be changed to explicitly provide for the process.

This ushers in a new chapter in the land question which began in 1652 with the landing of Dutch coloniser Jan van Riebeeck, and continued with the Land Act of 1913 and Group Areas Act of the 1960s which robbed the people of colour of their land, reserving it for whites only.

The report, compiled by the Constitutional Review Committee, was supported by 209 MPs and opposed by 91, following robust debate in the House.

The ANC earlier reiterated that the call for public submissions on whether the property clause in the Constitution should be amended was not a referendum but a call for “meaningful public participation”.

Speaking during the debate, committee co-chairperson Stanford Maila berated opposition parties for insisting that written submissions which were overwhelmingly against an amendment should be given more weight than public hearings in provinces which showed support for an amendment.

“Though it is of no significance, 65% of the submissions were against amending the Constitution,” said Maila.

“From the outset it should be clarified that this House did not give this committee the mandate to conduct a referendum. As a result, who makes an overemphasis on numbers would be grossly out of order.”

He said a legal challenge to the report and the amendment by the political opposition was a foregone conclusion.

EFF leader Julius Malema said those opposed to land expropriation without compensation were protecting white privilege at the expense of black people.

“This is in defence of white privilege which seeks to perpetuate landlessness among our people,” Malema told the chamber. He went on to accuse those opposed to changing the status quo where white people, the minority in South Africa, owned the majority of land, of a herd mentality.

“White people who came, all of them, poor or rich, the landless white people, all of them came in unison and opposed the expropriation of land without compensation because the reality is that where white interests and privilege is threatened, they protect one another and they don’t care when the other is in the wrong.”

The IFP, Freedom Front Plus and Cope all said they would oppose the recommended amendment.

They said despite lobby group AfriForum losing its case in the Western Cape High Court last Friday, they were confident they have solid ground to challenge the expropriation of land without compensation.

Freedom Front Plus MP Corne Mulder charged that the report was “not worth the paper it was written on”, citing among other objections, a lack of debate within the committee.

Cope’s Deidre Carter insisted that in its current form, section 25 of the Constitution allowed for expropriation without compensation and carried an explicit mandate for land reform.

“Just and equitable compensation could very well mean very little or no compensation,” she said, in reference to the current wording of the clause.

DA MP Thandeka Mbabama told the National Assembly: “The recommendation of the Constitutional Review Committee (CRC) to amend the Constitution to allow for expropriation without compensation was a foregone conclusion.

“That is why ANC President Cyril Ramaphosa cynically made a latenight announcement on TV in July that the ruling party had decided to go ahead with changing the Constitution to allow for expropriation without compensation.

“It is obvious that, from the onset, the integrity of the Joint CRC was compromised by collusion between the wily EFF and the beleaguered ANC.”