Confusion still reigns on ANC land measures
The ANC wants the constitution changed to allow for land expropriation without compensation, but how it envisions implementing the measure is unclear.
“It’s as clear as an opaque window,” political analyst Prof Somadoda Fikeni of Unisa said.
“The ANC has been saying this. They said it at the Nasrec [national elective conference] and what the NEC has decided at the lekgotla is nothing new.”
On Tuesday night, Ramaphosa – in his capacity as ANC president – addressed the nation, reaffirming the party’s stance from the NEC lekgotla, in Pretoria, that in the interest of reform, the government needed to unlock land.
In a statement, he said: “There is also a growing body of opinion, by a number of South Africans, that the constitution as it stands does not impede expropriation of land without compensation.
“The lekgotla reaffirmed its position that a comprehensive land reform programme that enables equitable access to land will unlock economic growth, by bringing more land in South Africa to full use, and enable the productive participation of millions more South Africans in the economy.
“Accordingly, the ANC will, through the parliamentary process, finalise a proposed amendment to the constitution that outlines more clearly the conditions under which expropriation of land without compensation can be effected.”
On Wednesday, the ANC’s chair of the subcommittee of economic transformation, Enoch Godongwana, said: “We will use the constitutional review process to strengthen and clarify. We cannot ignore the voices of our people.
“There’s an overwhelming view that there should be clarity of purpose under which conditions we will do expropriation without compensation, and that is necessary not only for our people, but for society as a whole; clarity on the rules of the game.”
ANC NEC member Ronald Lamola said the plan was not to nationalise land, but rather to give ownership directly to dispossessed black people.
“We are going to take [the land] and give it to the people who are going to use it.
“We are going to give them title deeds. We are not nationalising the land of this country.
“If we nationalise the land‚ we are going to dispossess the black people who have land; the black people who have moved into urban areas.
“What will the government do with an individual’s house?” Lamola said.
Political analyst Prof Mcebisi Ndletyana does not believe there would be any dramatic changes to the constitution.
“We are not any wiser about how this would unfold, but the president hinted at some of the considerations.
“He said the current wording of Section 25 [of the constitution] doesn’t make it clear that the state can expropriate land.
“I believe there would be an amendment to simplify the language.”
Ndletyana said the decision to let Ramaphosa address the nation had been aimed at controlling the narrative coming out of Luthuli House as the issue had massive implications for the economy.
Nelson Mandela University political analyst Ongama Mtimka said the wording used by Ramaphosa and ANC secretary-general Ace Magashule was slightly different.
“Where Ramaphosa mentioned only the need to spell out the conditions under which expropriation may happen, Magashule said that they need a ‘less restrictive’ section.
“Constitutions should be foresighted enough to close any gaps for future tyrants to use arbitrarily against society.
“There is a case to be made in factoring in expropriation without compensation as an available instrument more explicitly and for the conditions under which such expropriation may take place spelled out clearly,” Mtimka said.