LAND Expropriation, a hot-button topic since the dawn of democracy, with the New Expropriation Bill just signed into law, the Bill replaces the outdated Expropriation Act of 1975, aligning expropriation laws with the Constitution.
However, its allowance for expropriation without compensation in specific cases demands scrutiny of its potential impact.
A legislative Imperative
The apartheid-era Expropriation Act of 1975 clashed with the democratic principles enshrined in the 1996 Constitution. Its reliance on a willing-buyer, willing-seller model failed to deliver meaningful land reform. The new Expropriation Bill seeks to establish a uniform framework compliant with Section 25 of the Constitution, which governs property rights and land reform.
The Bill permits expropriation in two cases: for public purposes, such as infrastructure projects, and in the public interest, to address historical inequalities. It introduces provisions for nil compensation under specific conditions, including abandoned land, land posing health risks, or land acquired solely for speculation.
A delayed Initiative
This legislation’s journey, spanning nearly two decades, highlights the ANC’s challenges in navigating political and societal complexities. First introduced in 2008, the Bill was withdrawn after parliamentary legal advisers raised concerns about its constitutionality, particularly the lack of recourse to the courts. It resurfaced in 2015 as a revised version, only to be returned to Parliament by then-President Jacob Zuma in 2017 over insufficient public consultations.
Amid political jockeying ahead of the ANC’s 2017 national elective conference, the Bill was again withdrawn. At Nasrec, the party adopted a resolution for compensationless expropriation without compromising food security or economic stability. Between 2018 and 2021, the focus shifted to a constitutional review of Section 25 to make explicit provisions for nil compensation. However, the ANC failed to secure the two-thirds majority needed for a constitutional amendment, forcing a return to legislative reform. Public consultations on the current Bill began in March 2021, concluding in August of the same year. Progress stalled until 2024, when the National Assembly approved the Bill with 205 votes in favour and 108 against, largely backed by ANC numbers. The Bill’s finalisation in 2025 underscores the protracted nature of South Africa’s land reform efforts.
Opposition and GNU dynamics
The DA, FF Plus, and Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP) have consistently opposed the Bill, citing threats to property rights and economic stability. Now part of the Government of National Unity (GNU), these parties face the challenge of balancing their ideological positions with coalition obligations. The DA, as the ANC’s primary coalition partner, has seen its influence tested repeatedly in this arrangement of convenience. Whether it will maintain its opposition to the Bill or compromise for coalition stability remains uncertain. Adding to the complexity is the leadership of the Department of Public Works and Infrastructure by the DA's Dean Macpherson. His alignment with or resistance to ANC directives will shape the implementation of the Bill, reflecting broader tensions within the GNU.
Is It really enough?
The Expropriation Bill’s passage raises critical questions: is it enough to undo the injustices of apartheid? While the Bill establishes a framework for land redistribution, its success depends on effective implementation, transparency, and the state’s capacity to manage the process fairly.
Courts will play a vital role in resolving disputes and ensuring constitutional compliance.
However, the Bill alone cannot address decades of inequality. Comprehensive land reform requires parallel initiatives, including securing land tenure, supporting agricultural development, and investing in rural infrastructure.
Without these measures, the Bill risks becoming a symbolic gesture rather than a transformative tool. The Bill represents a step towards aligning South Africa’s land reform framework with its constitutional commitments.
Yet, its delayed passage reflects the complexities of navigating political and societal tensions. The ANC took 17 years of its 30 years in power to pass this legislation. Implementation remains the real test. While the Bill signals progress, does fulfilling overdue obligations warrant accolades?
For the ANC, the Bill’s passage is a chance to demonstrate delivery on long-standing promises. For the country, it offers a potential turning point in addressing historical injustices. Realising this potential depends on the state’s ability to balance justice, fairness, and economic stability in its pursuit of land reform.
Tara Roos | Constantia Hills
*Cape Times