Abstract
AbstractIt has partly been assumed that the constitutional obligation to pay compensation for expropriations is to blame for the slow pace at which land has been redistributed in South Africa. However, this assumption requires careful analysis and reflection, with reference to the imperfections of the policies and laws that set out to address landlessness, as well as the underlying theoretical approach to economic justice. This article questions the purpose for which land reform beneficiaries acquire land, with reference to the role that property should ideally fulfil for the landless. The article makes a number of observations to cast light on why the redistribution of land has been alarmingly slow, where inconsistencies and loopholes exist in the programme, and whether expropriations for nil compensation will make any difference in remedying existing failures in the redistribution programme.
Highlights
The article makes a number of observations to cast light on why the redistribution of land has been alarmingly slow, where inconsistencies and loopholes exist in the programme, and whether expropriations for nil compensation will make any difference in remedying existing failures in the redistribution programme
Part and parcel of the entire land reform directive is the aim of redressing injustices of the past, but restorative justice in itself fails to describe why it is important for land to be distributed among beneficiaries, what function the institution of property has to fulfil, and how that impacts our approach to the redistribution imperative
The Land Redistribution and Agricultural Development Policy (LRAD) signalled another distinctive step away from the initial redistribution mandate; more emphasis was placed on large-scale commercial farming, which was mainly reserved for the better-off black farmers
Summary
The proposed constitutional amendment of the Property Clause implies that the constitutional obligation to pay compensation for expropriation is, at least partly, to blame for the slow pace at which land reform, redistribution, has been implemented. The article questions the purpose behind land reform beneficiaries acquiring land, with reference to the role that property should ideally fulfil in society, for the vulnerable. Throughout this analysis, the article makes a number of observations to cast light on why the redistribution of land has been alarmingly slow, where incongruities and loopholes continue to exist in the programme, and whether expropriations for nil compensation will make any difference in remedying existing failures
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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
