Ramaphosa admits sections of expropriation act unconstitutional

In a significant development for South African property rights, President Cyril Ramaphosa has officially acknowledged that certain sections of the expropriation act are unconstitutional. This admission comes as part of an ongoing legal challenge in the Cape Town High Court, where various stakeholders are contesting the legislation’s validity.

Key unconstitutional sections identified

Sections 19(2), (3), and (4) of the Expropriation Act have been specifically highlighted as problematic. These sections erroneously allow for property expropriation before landowners can challenge the decision in court, raising serious constitutional concerns.

The president’s admission under oath indicates these sections may be void for vagueness and contradict other parts of the legislation. This acknowledgment represents a crucial turning point in the ongoing debate about property rights in South Africa.

Legal implications and proposed solutions

Ramaphosa has requested the court to remedy the unconstitutional elements through a “reading in” approach, effectively asking for judicial amendments to the problematic sections. However, this proposal has met with resistance from legal experts and stakeholders.

Key challenges

• The extent of required amendments may exceed judicial authority
• Constitutional concerns about property rights protection
• Procedural issues regarding implementation

Stakeholder responses

AfriForum’s CEO, Kallie Kriel, has welcomed the president’s acknowledgment but argues that such extensive amendments should be handled by parliament rather than the courts. Critics maintain that these issues should have been addressed before the Act was signed into law on December 20, 2024.

Background of the expropriation act

The new legislation replaces the Expropriation Act of 63 of 1975 and aims to establish clearer provisions for property expropriation.

Its primary objectives include:

• Setting procedures for public purpose expropriation
• Establishing just compensation frameworks
• Defining circumstances for nil compensation

Current status and way forward

With sections of the expropriation act deemed unconstitutional, the legislation’s future remains uncertain. The ongoing court case will likely determine whether the Act requires parliamentary revision or if judicial intervention can resolve the constitutional concerns.

This development highlights the complex balance between property rights protection and the government’s ability to implement land reform measures effectively.