Constitution there to guide land reform

IS land in South Africa a question without an answer, as some would like us to believe? Has the orderly manner of dealing with land reform failed? Is section 25 of the constitution an enabler in the quest for land reform?

Land is not only an emotional issue but a conflictual one as well, compounded by our horrendous history.

We waged a just war and we triumphed. Scars of that war are still visible and painful.

This explains why we become hot under the collar when the issue of land is mentioned.

The constitution of a democratic South Africa was enacted in 1996. It was never going to miss addressing the issue of land dispossession.

Section 25 warns that no one may be deprived of property except in terms of a law of general application, and no law may permit arbitrary deprivation of property.

Subsection 5 of this section orders that the state must take reasonable legislative and other measures with its available resources.

Section 25 clearly asserts that property must be expropriated. Expropriation must be for public purpose and in the public interest.

This means expropriation must take place with the aim of reconstructing a country destroyed by gruesome laws.

Section 25 lists six circumstances that must be considered in the process of expropriation, including the current use of the property, the history of the acquisition and the use of the property.

Our constitution states that compensation should be just and equitable.

If anything, we must demand that the government implement section 25 speedily. — Thando Wababa, Bellville

Shaik must speak up

THERE is one person who could prove or disprove the alleged corruption history of President Jacob Zuma. After all, he was found guilty of having a corrupt relationship with the man.

What defines a relationship? Oxford Dictionary says: “The way in which two or more people or things are connected.”

This presupposes a relationship consists of two or more people. So, in the case of Schabir Shaik, the relationship was between him and one other.

In his summary, the judge said payments made to Zuma by Shaik constituted a benefit under the definition of corruption.

Shaik was sentenced to a jail term, but the pal he helped financially in the said corrupt transactions — Zuma, the deputy president at the time — walked away.

Why was he the only one to bear the brunt?

Shaik should substitute his golf clubs for a laptop and write his memoirs, describing in great detail what brought on the cosy tie-up with Zuma and what transpired behind closed doors.

After all, it was Shaik who was branded the crook, and who singlehandedly faced the music.

It is time to set the record straight. Call it revenge if you like. — Cliff Buchler, George

Schools first, statues later

THE North West government’s plans to erect a statue of President Jacob Zuma on the site of his arrest might be good in the future but not now.

As a country we are faced with hard economic times and that calls for prioritising spending.

The site is a heritage site and heritage policies discourage honouring living individuals in the form of a statue.

We have seen heroes turning into villains, hence the discouragement to honour living individuals.

Zuma has many cases pending, so it would be unwise to spend R6-million on a statue of such a person.

It might be considered once he has cleared his name.

We have pressing challenges that need to be prioritised, such as houses, schools, roads, healthcare facilities and free quality tertiary education.

We can survive without statues, but will perish without our basic needs being met.

I hope and trust the North West government will put this noble idea on hold until we improve the lives of our people and the economy.

It is an opportunity for the ANC to show that it has repented and is mending its wayward way of doing things. — Moses Zola Manake, Roodekrans

Mine article misses mark

ALTHOUGH your reporter was kind enough to contact us for comment on the article “Fertiliser quest puts fossil ‘gold mine’ at risk” (March 5), there were aspects he did not share with us at the time.

Consequently, the report contains a few incorrect assertions, particularly regarding the geography of the project and the sensitive areas to which the article refers:

Elandsfontein Exploration and Mining (Pty) Ltd has no plans to mine the area where it is expected fossils will be found. On the contrary, we have worked with Heritage Western Cape to proclaim the Elandsfontein dune field as a provincial heritage site, which protects the area’s integrity;

There will be no mining “borrow pits” overflowing into any park;

The article states that the mine is 1km from the fossil park which recently landed R67-million in Lotto funding. The author has the wrong fossil park. In fact, the mine is 18.5km from the existing fossil park which is receiving Lotto funding; and

It states that the mine is in a buffer zone of the West Coast National Park. This is incorrect.

Elandsfontein has been engaging with the West Coast Fossil Park since 2010.

Our heritage impact assessment has shown that the development of the Elandsfontein mine will provide opportunities to explore and understand the local palaeontology that would not have otherwise existed.

Similarly, while the article may be correct that mining has on occasion caused environmental damage, we would invite him to examine our world-class environmentally conscious operation to satisfy himself that this will certainly not be the case at Elandsfontein. — Michelle Lawrence, technical director, Elandsfontein Exploration and Mining