Why land reform is being revisited

In February Cyril Ramaphosa finally elbowed aside Jacob Zuma to become president of SA, a move that was welcomed by most South Africans and investors. Yet in recent months some have started to worry, in large part because of what the president has said about land reform. Ramaphosa describes the taking of land by whites from indigenous blacks as SA’s “original sin”. After the advent of democracy in 1994, the ANC pledged to use the state to buy up white farmland and give it away to blacks, provide compensation to those who were turfed off their land under British and later apartheid rule, and bolster the flimsy property rights of the black majority.

But the sluggish pace of change has frustrated many in the ANC, whose leaders are worried about losing votes to the EFF in the 2019 elections. For the EFF, and for many South Africans, the lack of reform has also become a proxy for enduring inequality. Land is hugely symbolic, and the ANC believes it has to be seen to be doing something.

What will happen? Pessimists fear that any change to the constitution will usher in a broader assault on property rights and perhaps even Zimbabwe-style land seizures. But they are in the minority, at least for now. For a start, any change to the constitution is unlikely to occur before the 2019 elections; it would hurt the EFF politically to side with their bigger rivals before the ballot.

Ramaphosa has insisted that change needs to be combined with an assessment of how expropriation could be done without hurting the economy or food production. He also likes to point out that the constitution might allow the taking of land without compensation; this is used to argue that the policy is not as radical as it may seem. This may be true. But it could create a problem for Ramaphosa should he raise hope of improving the lot of poor South Africans, only for nothing to change in practice.