Fears and uncertainty over the government’s plan to expropriate land without compensation have been rampant since the Constitution Eighteenth Amendment Bill was submitted for comment while most South Africans were preoccupied with their December holidays.
Questions about the wording, possible goal-shifting down the line and the scope of its definitions have allowed armchair legal practitioners to envision several apocalyptic scenarios. The official opposition in the South African Parliament, in a recent call to comment on the Bill, suggested that the “government would be free to take your home, business, land … in fact, anything that you own”.
Cilna Steyn, Managing Director of property law experts, SSLR Incorporated, set the record straight on some of the more alarmist claims made to date. Responding to the aforementioned claim against private homes and businesses, she stated, “The amendment does not specify land, but I believe that this interpretation is far from correct because it specifically refers to ‘for the purposes of land reform’. Private homes and businesses do not form part of the envisaged land reform. Even though the amendment does not state this, the focus still remains on economically unused farms and similar land. This amendment does not amend any other law, but the particular part of section 25. There are so many other laws impacting on private homes and commercial land that I believe this is exactly one of those political stunts.”
Accusations that the government would use the amendment to slyly slip through legislation that could allow for mass confiscations, Cilna again refuted, saying, “These amendments or addendums must still comply with all provisions of the law; so it cannot be said that this could lead to a side amendment allowing someone just to walk in and take your house. Any future legislation or amendments of legislation must follow the usual law-making process and must comply with all the provisions of the Constitution and other legislation. Above all, the Constitutional Court’s jurisdiction is not impacted in any way and will always be the body with the final word in Constitutional matters.”
Even if matters become increasingly dystopian there are avenues whereby the public and civic organisations are able to intervene. “Even in its current form the Bill’s reference to courts and judicial oversight is not removed in any way. As long as this is the position you will always have the right to appeal procedures to the highest court. Even without that, the Constitutional Court’s inherent jurisdiction can never, ever be removed, always leaving the Constitutional Court as a potential court to appeal to.”
Comment on the Constitution Eighteen Amendment Bill closes on 31 January and the public is urged to have the weight of opinion recorded. Even after that date there are several stages to go before the doomsday prophecies come true. Trust though that the best legal minds in the country will do whatever they can to ensure that the fear-mongers and political opportunists remain forever disappointed.
