Agri SA worried about expropriation bill

Johannesburg – Agri SA said on Friday it was not happy about the select committee on economic and business development approving the expropriation bill. 

“The definition limits compensable takings of property to instances where the State has acquired the property,” chairperson of the Agri SA agricultural development committee Ernest Pringle said. “The Constitution contains no such limitation.”

Agri SA spokesperson Thea Liebenberg said the definition of “expropriation” is still in the bill despite Agri SA’s attempts to have it removed or amended.

Pringle said provincial hearings on the bill were called at short notice and public participation was limited.

He said that in the Constitutional Court case of Agri SA against the Mineral Resources Minister Ngoako Ramatlhodi, the court found that there could be no expropriation in circumstances where deprivation does not result in property being acquired by the State.

“Only where the State acquires property for itself is it considered an expropriation.”

The Constitutional Court held that the taking of old order mineral rights by the State as custodian of the minerals, did not amount to expropriation and was not compensable.

Pringle said the definition in the expropriation bill is in line with this, but he believed this was a worrying factor.

“The expropriation bill itself contains no new powers of expropriation, any attempt to take agricultural land without compensation will have to come through the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries or land generally through the Minister of Rural Development and Land Reform.”

Agri SA said it would fight any attempts in court and that, when it happened, the implementation of this law would be carefully examined.

We live in a world where facts and fiction get blurred
In times of uncertainty you need journalism you can trust. For 14 free days, you can have access to a world of in-depth analyses, investigative journalism, top opinions and a range of features. Journalism strengthens democracy. Invest in the future today. Thereafter you will be billed R75 per month. You can cancel anytime and if you cancel within 14 days you won't be billed. 
Subscribe to News24
Voting Booth
A Section 89 panel headed by former chief justice Sandile Ngcobo found President Cyril Ramaphosa has an impeachable case to answer on the Phala Phala scandal.
Please select an option Oops! Something went wrong, please try again later.
Results
Ramaphosa should do the honourable thing and immediately resign.
22% - 2073 votes
Ramaphosa should follow due process and submit himself to an impeachment hearing.
30% - 2800 votes
Ramaphosa should fight the findings in court and keep his job at all costs
48% - 4527 votes
Vote
Rand - Dollar
17.34
+0.7%
Rand - Pound
21.05
+1.1%
Rand - Euro
18.15
+0.9%
Rand - Aus dollar
11.60
+0.8%
Rand - Yen
0.13
+0.8%
Gold
1,771.82
+0.2%
Silver
22.19
-0.3%
Palladium
1,856.14
-1.1%
Platinum
991.00
-0.9%
Brent Crude
82.68
-3.5%
Top 40
68,420
-0.2%
All Share
74,557
-0.2%
Resource 10
73,980
-1.1%
Industrial 25
91,397
-0.1%
Financial 15
15,738
+0.9%
All JSE data delayed by at least 15 minutes Iress logo
Editorial feedback and complaints

Contact the public editor with feedback for our journalists, complaints, queries or suggestions about articles on News24.

LEARN MORE