A libertarian think-tank has called for a socioeconomic impact assessment on expropriation without compensation to be conducted, saying such a study will reveal the consequences of amending the property clause of the constitution.
This, however, is unlikely to happen as parliament rushes to finalise the proposed amendment to the constitution by the end of May. Public hearings are due to start on Tuesday.
The Free Market Foundation said a proper socioeconomic impact assessment on the amendment bill will show that immense harm will be done to the economy, particularly to the poor, should a law of this nature be adopted.
“Government is asking South Africans to leap blindly into the experiment of expropriation without compensation, which has always done its part to destroy economies in Venezuela and Zimbabwe,” the foundation’s Martin van Staden said at the weekend.
The land expropriation issue has divided the country and put investors on edge amid concern that the programme, which is meant to address SA’s skewed land ownership dating back to the colonial and apartheid era, is a risk to security of tenure.
There are also fears that SA’s approach to the issue could echo Zimbabwe’s chaotic land reform programme of two decades ago that resulted in an economic and social crisis from which it has struggled to recover.
In 2020, the Zimbabwean government said about 200 foreign white farmers whose land was seized under the country’s controversial land reform programme can now register to be allocated farms in the event the government fails to pay compensation, as it ramps up efforts to mend ties with the West.
But the SA government maintains the land reform programme here will be orderly and not lead to an economic downfall or undermine food security.
The Free Market Foundation said an amendment to the constitution is an important event, requiring the government to act in good faith by allowing all concerned citizens and civil society formations to participate in the process.
Van Staden said: “As things currently stand, there is a right to always be paid an amount in compensation when private property is expropriated. The Constitution Eighteenth Amendment Bill removes that unqualified right, and replaces it with a qualified right that depends entirely on how government exercises its discretion. Whichever way you slice it, this is a weakening of the right to property, not an advancement of it.”
He said the amendment bill and the separate but related Expropriation Bill outlining the circumstances under which compensation could be nil, represent two of the most invasive and disruptive interventions in three decades of SA public policy.
“That neither intervention was accompanied by a [socioeconomic impact assessment] is indicative of government either wishing to hide the inevitable consequences that will result from the adoption of these two bills, or not caring enough about hard-won civil liberties to inquire in the first place.”
Recently parliament’s multiparty ad hoc committee tasked with drafting the amendment to the constitution resolved to request an extension to the initial deadline of March 19, to allow interested parties to make oral representations.
“It is import to note that we will not be calling for new submissions or public hearings. The committee will be receiving oral presentations only from those submitters who had indicated within the deadline in their written submissions that they wish to do so. I wish to emphasise that we are not reopening the entire process of public participation,” ad hoc committee chair Mathole Motshekga said at the time.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.