Abstract

It is often stated that indigenous law confers no property rights in land. Okoth-Ogenda reconceptualised indigenous land rights by debunking the myth that indige-nous land rights systems are necessarily "communal" in nature, that "ownership" is collective and that the community as an entity makes collective decisions about the access and use of land. He offers a different understanding of indigenous land rights systems by looking at the social order of communities that create "reciprocal rights and obligations that this binds together, and vests power in the community members over land". To determine who will be granted access to or exercise control over land and the resources, one needs to look at these rights and obligations and the performances that arise from them. This will leave only two distinct questions: who may have access to the land (and what type of access) and who may control and manage the land resources on behalf of those who have access to it? There is a link with this reconceptualisation and the discourse of the commons. Os-trom's classification of goods leads to a definition of the commons (or common pool of resources) as "a class of resources for which exclusion is difficult and joint use in-volves subtractablity". The questions this article wishes to answer are: would it firstly be possible to classify the indigenous land rights system as a commons, and sec-ondly would it provide a useful analytical framework in which to solve the problem of securing land tenure in South Africa?KEYWORDS: Indigenous law; African indigenous land rights; property rights; African indigenous land tenure; the commons

Highlights

  • Section 25(6) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 entitles persons or communities "whose tenure of land is legally insecure as a result of past racially discriminatory laws or practices" to tenure which is legally secure

  • The characteristics of African indigenous land tenure are firstly that land is held as a transgenerational asset, secondly that it is managed on different levels of the social organisational structure, and lastly that it is used in function-specific ways.[92]

  • African indigenous land tenure was interpreted in this framework in such a way that the people's relationship with the land was not recognised, and the land held in terms of indigenous tenure was often declared res nullius due to its not being "owned" in the common law sense.[93]

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Section 25(6) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 entitles persons or communities "whose tenure of land is legally insecure as a result of past racially discriminatory laws or practices" to tenure which is legally secure. Should tenure be secured in the private ownership paradigm, or should indigenous forms of land tenure be fully recognised and protected.[6] Due to the domination of private property in the officially recognised laws of South Africa before the advent of constitutional democracy, the inclination is towards protection in the private ownership paradigm The success of such an approach is questionable, and in the recent case of Tongoane v National Minister for Agriculture and Land Affairs[7] the Constitutional Court declared the Communal Land Rights Act,[8] which was meant to be the legislation securing indigenous land rights, unconstitutional.[9] The problem remains: how do we secure indigenous land rights?. The solution to this, according to Hardin, is privatisation and regulation.[13]

Pre-colonial African indigenous land tenure
African indigenous land tenure today
The characteristics of indigenous law land tenure today
Preliminary analysis of African indigenous land tenure
A short introduction to the commons
African indigenous land tenure as a commons?
Findings
Conclusion

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.