Get in touch
555-555-5555
mymail@mailservice.com
Media verklaring - 25 Januarie 2025
Terug na media
Onteieningswet - Suid-Afrika betaal prys vir ANC mislukkings
(Engelse verklaring volg onder)
Onteieningswetgewing en die gevolge
– Suid-Afrika hou aan om ʼn prys te betaal vir die ANC se ideologie van die Nasionale Demokratiese Revolusie
- President Ramaphosa het die Regering van Nasionale Eenheid (RNE) op risiko geplaas
Die Afrikanerbond was baie duidelik in die verlede dat enige proses wat ʼn eensydige verandering in eiendomsreg voorstaan, nie aanvaar kan word nie. Daarom is President Ramaphosa se ondertekening van die wet wel teleurstellend, maar nie onverwags nie.
In die verlede is talle versekeringe gegee ten einde beleidsonsekerheid op te klaar. Die mees onlangse is die president se toespraak op 21 Januarie by die Wêreld Ekonomiese Forum in Davos. Hy het die geleentheid ook gebruik om Suid-Afrika se Presidentskap van die G20 en die beraad later die jaar in Suid-Afrika te bevorder. Hy sê onder andere: “South Africa has a rich history of inclusive dialogue and common action. Over the last few years, the South African government has been working closely with social partners in business and in labour to address key national challenges and drive inclusive growth.”
Sterk klem is geplaas om investering in Afrika en Suid-Afrika aan te moedig. Enkele ure later onderteken hy die wetgewing wat onteiening sonder vergoeding moontlik maak. Wat hy nagelaat het om te sê is dat hy advies uit soveel oorde gekry het om die wetgewing terug te verwys na die Nasionale Vergadering. Die ontneming en onteiening van eiendom word nou slegs ʼn simbool vir politieke doeleindes.
Suid-Afrika gee op internasionale verhoë een tree vorentoe maar met die met uiters onbeholpe hantering van wetgewing en beleidsuitvoering drie tree terug.
Nie net is die wetgewing ongrondwetlik nie maar is Suid-Afrika in direkte konflik met die VN se Universele Verklaring van Menseregte. Onteiening sonder vergoeding is in stryd met die gevestigde internasionale beginsel van die Verklaring. "Article 17. (1) Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others. (2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property."
Suid-Afrika is mede-ondertekenaar van hierdie handves. Daarom moet die vraag ook gevra word of mnr Ramaphosa enige integriteit nog het in die internasionale gemeenskap om die G20 presidentskap te hanteer. Die G20 is daarop gerig om internasionale samewerking oor globale ekonomiese en politieke kwessies te fasiliteer. Beduidende internasionale menseregteskendings of ongrondwetlike optrede bring reputasieskade vir die land wat die G20 beraad aanbied. Suid-Afrika staan op die rand van ʼn ideologiese en morele afgrond gelei deur die ANC leierskap, en is Suid-Afrika se integriteit by die G20 op die spel.
Suid-Afrika betaal die laaste paar jaar die duur prys van ANC beleidsmislukkings. Die ideologie van sentralisering deur transformasie het die laaste maande geblyk uit die BELA wetgewing, Eiendomsreg wat verskraal word deur die onteieningswetgewing, gesondheid wat op die spel geplaas word met die beoogde Nasionale Gesondheidsversekering, BEE wat al meer misluk en met ‘n R100 miljard fonds gestut moet word en vele meer.
Ons is oop vir besigheid predik die president aan die een kant terwyl sy pen aan die ander kant die deure vir besigheid toeklap en doodsmoor.
Onteiening het die politieke speelbal geword van verskeie ANC mislukte beleide. Die verslag van die High Level Panel (HLP) onder leiding van oud President Kgalema Motlanthe wat op November 2017 voltooi en by die Parlement ingedien is, is nog nooit deur die Parlement oorweeg of bespreek nie. Die verslag met meer as 100 aanbevelings se eerlikheid oor die stand van sake, veral wat grondhervorming aanbetref was waarskynlik te eerlik, het te diep gesny en het verantwoordelikheid en aanspreeklikheid vereis.
Verdoemende bevindings word in die verslag gemaak:
“Experts advise that the need to pay compensation has not been the most serious constraint on land reform in South Africa to date – other constraints, including increasing evidence of corruption by officials, the diversion of the land reform budget to elites, lack of political will, and lack of training and capacity have proved more serious stumbling blocks to land reform.”
Ons word verder gerig deur die volgende gedeelte in die samevatting van die High Level Panel se verslag:
“The Panel is of the view that government has not used the powers it already has to expropriate land for land reform purposes effectively, nor used the provisions in the Constitution that allow compensation to be below market value in particular circumstances.”
En ook:
“The Constitution provides for positive land rights in Sections 25(5), (6), (7) and (9). These are the rights to equitable access (redistribution), tenure security and restitution. These rights are not being adequately promoted, enforced and protected. Instead, they appear to be under attack from policies and practices that redirect the benefits of land reform to potential political alliances with specific elites.”
Die ANC se mislukkings word deeglik uitgewys met die gedeelte van die omvattende verslag wat soos volg lui:
“The Panel found that in many instances the problems identified do not arise from the terms of the law per se, but rather from failures of implementation and enforcement.”
In die Konstitusionele Hof se beslissing in Mwelase and Others v Director-General for the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform and Another, gelewer in 2019, het Regter Edwin Cameron die volgende in die uitspraak geskryf.
“In this, the Department has jeopardised not only the rights of land claimants, but the constitutional security and future of all. South Africans have been waiting for more than 25 years for equitable land reform. More accurately, they have been waiting for centuries before. The Department’s failure to practically manage and expedite land reform measures in accordance with constitutional and statutory promises has profoundly exacerbated the intensity and bitterness of our national debate about land reform. It is not the Constitution, nor the courts, nor the laws of the country that are at fault in this. It is the institutional incapacity of the Department to do what the statute and the Constitution require of it that lies at the heart of this colossal crisis.”
Die Onteieningswet is nou geteken en is amptelik. Alhoewel daar regulasies geskryf moet word deur die Departement van Openbare Werke, skep die wetgewing die ideologiese begronding vir implementering. Dit is waar die wesenlike gevaar lê. Op Saterdag 25 Januarie 2025 het president Ramaphosa bevestig dat die GNU die Nasionale Demokratiese Revolusie moet bevorder.
Deur enigsins met ʼn onteieningsproses te begin veral as die ‘openbare belang’ ideologies geïnterpreteer gaan word, is nie net kommerwekkend nie. Dit moet potensiële internasionale beleggers en versekeringe wat die president by Davos gegee het twee keer laat dink.
Die President het met die ondertekening van die wetgewing weer eens die Nasionale Demokratiese Revolusie bo die grondwet geplaas en eerder sy interne faksies getroos en daardeur die sukses en voortbestaan van die Regering van Nasionale Eenheid op risiko geplaas.
ʼn Verdere implikasie wat verreken moet word is dat grond met nabelaste gelde gekoop en betaal word. Met onteiening sonder vergoeding neem die staat dus die grond en steel die belasting terselfdertyd. Dit kan eenvoudig nie werk in die praktyk nie. Indien die staat die grond neem moet die belasting wat daarop betaal is teruggee word.
Dat grondverdeling in Suid-Afrika moet plaasvind word aanvaar en is verskeie voorstelle in die verband deus ʼn magdom instansies gemaak. So ʼn proses moet egter op 'n billike, eerlike, regverdige, openlike en ordelike wyse geskied en moet die beginsels van eiendomsreg insluit.
Ons is op rekord dat ons gesê dat die ANC regering nie vertrou word met grond, eiendomsreg of selfs prosesse tot grondhervorming nie. Daarvoor is die bal te veel keer laat val en verbrou deur ʼn onbevoegde en onbekwame regering en onbeholpe beleidsimplementering met grootskaalse korrupsie. Die RNE is nie in ʼn posisie om die skade wat reeds aangerig is te herstel nie want groter skade is reeds oppad.
Die grondwetlikheid van die wetsontwerp en die proses wat dit gevolg het moet opnuut bevraagteken word en dit is op die stadium onvermydelik dat die ondeurdagte kwessie deur litigasie verder geneem sal word. Die Afrikanerbond sal alle ondersteuning gee aan die partye en instansies wat dit dryf. Alle bestaande metodes en moontlikhede is nie naasteby ontgin nie.
Datum: 25 Januarie 2025
_________________________________________________________________________
Expropriation Act and the consequences
– South Africa continues to pay the price for the ANC's ideology of the National Democratic Revolution
- President Ramaphosa has placed the Government of National Unity (GNU) at risk.
The Afrikanerbond has always been very clear about the unacceptability of any process advocating unilateral changes in property rights. President Ramaphosa's signing of the law is, therefore, disappointing – but it is not unexpected.
In the past, numerous assurances have been given to clarify undertainties around policy-making. The most recent is the President's speech on 21 January at the World Economic Forum in Davos. He also used the opportunity to promote South Africa's Presidency of the G20 and the summit later this year in South Africa.
He said, among other things: “South Africa has a rich history of inclusive dialogue and common action. Over the last few years, the South African government has been working closely with social partners in business and in labour to address key national challenges and drive inclusive growth.”
Strong emphasis was placed on encouraging investment in Africa and South Africa. Hours later, however, he signed legislation that allows expropriation without compensation. What he neglected to say is that he was advised by many to refer the legislation back to the National Assembly. It is pure and simple: The dispossession and expropriation of property has become a symbol used for political purposes.
South Africa takes one step forward on international stages but three steps back with its extremely inept handling of legislation and policy implementation.
Not only is the legislation unconstitutional, but South Africa is now in breach of the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Expropriation without compensation is at variance with the established international principles of the Declaration set out in Article 17: (1) Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others. (2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property." South Africa is a co-signatory of this charter.
This begs the question whether Mr Ramaphosa still has the necessary integrity in the international community to hold the G20 presidency. The G20 aims to facilitate international cooperation on global economic and political issues. Significant international human rights violations or unconstitutional actions cause reputational damage to the country hosting the G20 summit. South Africa stands on the brink of an ideological and moral abyss under ANC leadership, and our country's integrity at the G20 is at stake.
South Africa has been paying a heavy price for ANC policy failures over the last few years. The ideology of centralisation through transformation has become apparent in recent months through the BELA legislation, property rights being attenuated by the expropriation legislation, health being put at risk with the proposed National Health Insurance, BEE increasingly failing and needing to be supported with a R100 billion fund, and much more.
We are open for business, the president preaches on the one hand, while on the other, his pen slams the doors to business and suffocates the economy.
Expropriation has become a political pawn played by the ANC to justify several of its failed policies. The report of the High-Level Panel (HLP) led by former President Kgalema Motlanthe, completed in November 2017 and submitted to Parliament, has never been considered or discussed by Parliament. This report, containing more than 100 recommendations, was probably too honest about the true state of affairs, especially regarding land reform. It cut too deep, demanding responsibility and accountability.
Damning findings made in the report include:
“Experts advise that the need to pay compensation has not been the most serious constraint on land reform in South Africa to date – other constraints, including increasing evidence of corruption by officials, the diversion of the land reform budget to elites, lack of political will, and lack of training and capacity have proved more serious stumbling blocks to land reform.”
We are further guided by the following passage in the summary of the High-Level Panel's report:
“The Panel is of the view that government has not used the powers it already has to expropriate land for land reform purposes effectively, nor used the provisions in the Constitution that allow compensation to be below market value in particular circumstances.”
And also:
“The Constitution provides for positive land rights in Sections 25(5), (6), (7) and (9). These are the rights to equitable access (redistribution), tenure security and restitution. These rights are not being adequately promoted, enforced and protected. Instead, they appear to be under attack from policies and practices that redirect the benefits of land reform to potential political alliances with specific elites.”
The ANC's failures are thoroughly pointed out in the section of the comprehensive report that reads as follows:
“The Panel found that in many instances the problems identified do not arise from the terms of the law per se, but rather from failures of implementation and enforcement.”
The Constitutional Court's decision in Mwelase and Others v Director-General for the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform and Another, delivered in 2019, addressed the Department's failure to effectively implement land reform measures, thereby undermining the rights of land claimants and exacerbating national tensions surrounding land reform. Judge Edwin Cameron wrote in the ruling:
“In this, the Department has jeopardised not only the rights of land claimants, but the constitutional security and future of all. South Africans have been waiting for more than 25 years for equitable land reform. More accurately, they have been waiting for centuries before. The Department’s failure to practically manage and expedite land reform measures in accordance with constitutional and statutory promises has profoundly exacerbated the intensity and bitterness of our national debate about land reform. It is not the Constitution, nor the courts, nor the laws of the country that are at fault in this. It is the institutional incapacity of the Department to do what the statute and the Constitution require of it that lies at the heart of this colossal crisis.”
The Expropriation Act has now been signed and is official. Although regulations must be drafted by the Department of Public Works, the legislation creates the ideological foundation for implementation. This is where the real danger lies. On Saturday 25 January 2025 president Ramaphosa confirmed that the GNU must advance the National Democratic Revolution.
Not only is the very commencement of an expropriation process worrying, especially if the 'public interest' is going to be interpreted ideologically. It must also make potential international investors think twice, despite the assurances given by the President at Davos.
By signing the legislation, the President once again placed the National Democratic Revolution above the constitution and instead appeased his internal factions, thereby putting the success and survival of the Government of National Unity at risk.
A further implication that must be taken into account is that land is purchased and paid for with after-tax money. In the case of expropriation without compensation, the state is therefore taking the land and stealing the tax at the same time. It simply does not work like that in practice. If the state takes the land, the taxes paid on it must be returned.
It is accepted that land distribution must take place in South Africa, and various proposals in this regard have been made by a multitude of institutions. However, such a process must be conducted in a fair, honest, just, open and orderly manner, according to the principles of property law.
We are on record as saying that the ANC government is not to be trusted with land, property rights or even land reform processes. The ball has been dropped too many times and the process botched by an incompetent and inept government and clumsy policy implementation characterised by large-scale corruption. The GNU is not in a position to repair the damage that has already been done, because greater damage is already in the making.
The constitutionality of the bill and the process that was followed must be questioned anew, and it is inevitable at this stage that this ill-considered issue will be taken further through litigation. The Afrikanerbond will give its full support to the parties and institutions that drive it. The existing methods and possibilities have not been exploited at all.
Date: 25 January 2025
