OPINION | 10 reasons why the Expropriation Bill is potentially unconstitutional

Share your Subscriber Article
You have 5 articles to share every month. Send this story to a friend!
0:00
play article
Subscribers can listen to this article
The Expropriation Bill goes beyond the ambit of the Constitutional property clause, say the writers.
The Expropriation Bill goes beyond the ambit of the Constitutional property clause, say the writers.
iStock

The Expropriation Bill goes beyond the ambit of the constitutional property clause and permits nil compensation in certain circumstances, deviating from the compensation-based nature of the Constitution, say Bulelwa Mabasa and Thomas Karberg. 

South Africans have recently been presented with the Expropriation Bill B3-2020 ("the Bill"). While it has drawn vociferous criticism from various voices, it is crucial to view the bill in the broader context of the land reform project. In our view, a unified system of expropriation and compensation is to be welcomed, as the compensation mechanisms in the Expropriation Act No. 63 of 1975 ("the 1975 Act") and the Constitution have been inconsistent since the inception of the Constitution.

There’s more to this story
Subscribe to News24 and get access to our exclusive journalism and features today.
Subscribe
Already a subscriber? Sign in
USD/ZAR
14.31
(0.0)
GBP/ZAR
19.81
(0.0)
EUR/ZAR
17.15
(0.0)
AUD/ZAR
11.07
(0.0)
JPY/ZAR
0.13
(0.0)
Gold
1,776.67
(0.0)
Silver
25.97
(0.0)
Platinum
1,203.79
(0.0)
Brent Crude
66.77
(-0.3)
Palladium
2,781.00
(0.0)
All Share
68,699
(+1.3)
Top 40
62,898
(+1.3)
Financial 15
12,446
(+0.8)
Industrial 25
89,364
(+0.8)
Resource 10
70,350
(+2.2)
All JSE data delayed by at least 15 minutes Iress logo
Company Snapshot
Voting Booth
Please select an option Oops! Something went wrong, please try again later.
Results
Yes, and I've gotten it.
21% - 1277 votes
No, I did not.
52% - 3175 votes
My landlord refused
28% - 1707 votes
Vote