NEWS ANALYSIS: Issues raised at meetings on land and farming highlight disconnect
Should section 25 of the constitution be amended to allow the state to expropriate land in the public interest
The Joint Constitutional Review Committee, established to review the property clause of the constitution, is an unusual plebiscite as it is neither comprehensive nor representative, despite receiving more than 700,000 written submissions and hearing untold oral submissions countrywide. The committee concluded its final hearing on August 4. Its main question to South Africans was: should section 25 (and other sections) of the constitution be amended to allow the state to expropriate land in the public interest without compensation? If so, how should it be amended? That is the wrong question, says Ruth Hall, University of the Western Cape professor at the Institute for Poverty, Land and Agrarian Studies (Plaas). Section 25 is a carefully crafted piece of legislation, she says, and citizens cannot be expected to pronounce on matters of constitutional law. Hall’s comment highlights a disconnection in the debate about land in which the idea of land reform and expropriation without compen...
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.
Subscribe now to unlock this article.
Support BusinessLIVE’s award-winning journalism for R129 per month (digital access only).
There’s never been a more important time to support independent journalism in SA. Our subscription packages now offer an ad-free experience for readers.
Cancel anytime.
Questions? Email helpdesk@businesslive.co.za or call 0860 52 52 00. Got a subscription voucher? Redeem it now.