Avatar photo

By Eric Naki

Political Editor


ANC wants Cabinet to decide expropriated land payments

The ruling party plans to sidestep the courts blocking zero compensation, but the decision will certainly be challenged in the Constitutional Court, analysts say.


The ANC plans to sideline the courts and give power to Cabinet to determine the amount paid for expropriated land, in a move seen as an attempt to avoid the courts rejecting zero compensation, thus endangering a crucial party resolution on the controversial reform. At the weekend’s party lekgotla at Nasrec, the ANC endorsed the recommendation of the parliamentary ad hoc committee considering the proposed amendment of section 25 of the Constitution: the power to determine issues related to expropriation of the land without compensation would reside with the executive. The recommendations initially provided for zero compensation, determined by a…

Subscribe to continue reading this article
and support trusted South African journalism

Access PREMIUM news, competitions
and exclusive benefits

SUBSCRIBE
Already a member? SIGN IN HERE

The ANC plans to sideline the courts and give power to Cabinet to determine the amount paid for expropriated land, in a move seen as an attempt to avoid the courts rejecting zero compensation, thus endangering a crucial party resolution on the controversial reform.

At the weekend’s party lekgotla at Nasrec, the ANC endorsed the recommendation of the parliamentary ad hoc committee considering the proposed amendment of section 25 of the Constitution: the power to determine issues related to expropriation of the land without compensation would reside with the executive.

The recommendations initially provided for zero compensation, determined by a court.

The view that the Cabinet would take the lead was stressed by President Cyril Ramaphosa and by ANC secretary-general Ace Magashule after the meeting.

Some observers said the ANC wanted to fast-track the process without having to rely on courts. The courts were seen as prone to siding with the aggrieved and fighting executive excesses.

The aggrieved would likely be white land owners.

Yesterday, ad hoc committee chair Dr Mathole Motshekga emphasised this.

The committee decided to change the earlier proposal that the issue should be decided by the courts because court processes were arduous and took too long, whereas the executive was democratically elected, faster, represented the people and were in a better position to deal with the matter.

Motshekga said this consensus was reached with other parties to prevent controversy and delaying the expropriation process.

“If it’s left to the court, it could take 25 years and the South African people cannot wait another 25 years to get their land back,” Motshekga said.

However, the committee had not closed the opportunity for the courts to play a role. The courts would be asked to intervene only if someone was aggrieved with the executive decision pertaining to compensation, he said.

Political analyst Ralph Mathekga said the policy would certainly be challenged.

“Government’s policy will certainly be tested in court. The idea of giving power to the executive will also most likely face a court test.

“I am surprised the ANC is willing to design a policy that gives so much power to the executive, given that we see incidents of successful court litigation on testing the executive powers,” he said.

Yesterday, the Freedom Front Plus already announced it rejected the ANC proposal and the entire Bill and vowed to challenge it in the Constitutional Court.

According to leader Pieter Groenewald, the Bill was unconstitutional and the ANC was “taking a chance” to remove the role of the courts.

Groenewald said the ANC submitted a similar Bill in 2007, giving the minister of land affairs compensation power, but withdrew the Bill after it realised this was unconstitutional.

“The Freedom Front Plus totally rejects land expropriation without compensation.

“We also completely reject that this Bill says the executive should determine the amount of compensation.

“We say this is unconstitutional and will lead to arbitrary expropriation of property,” Groenewald said.

He added the legislation was also in violation of Article 17 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that guaranteed that individual property should not be arbitrarily taken away.

ericn@citizen.co.za

For more news your way, download The Citizen’s app for iOS and Android.

Access premium news and stories

Access to the top content, vouchers and other member only benefits