Cyril Ramaphosa signs a bill on expropriations in South Africa

South African President Cyril Ramaphosa has promulgated a bill authorizing land seizures by the State without compensation-a decision that disagreed him with certain members of his government.

More than 30 years after the end of the racist apartheid system, blacks have only a small fraction of agricultural land on a national scale – the majority remaining in the hands of the white minority.

This has aroused frustration and anger at the slow reform.

While Ramaphosa’s ancient party welcomed the law as an “important stage” in the transformation of the country, some members of the coalition government claim that they could challenge it in court.

The law “described how expropriation can be carried out and on what basis” by the State, affirms the government.

He replaced the pre-democratic law on the expropriation of 1975, which imposed on the state the obligation to pay the owners to whom he wanted to take the land, according to the principle “consenting seller, consenting buyer”.

The new law authorizes expropriation without compensation only in the circumstances where this is “fair and fair and in the public interest”.

This includes if the property is not used and there is no intention of developing it or drawing money or when it presents a risk for people.

President’s spokesman Vincent Magwenya said that by virtue of the law, the State “cannot expropriate goods in a arbitrary manner or for a purpose other than … the public interest”.

“Expropriation can only be exercised if the expropriating authority has tried without success to reach an agreement with the owner,” he added.

The signing of the law comes after a five -year advisory process as well as the conclusions of a presidential panel set up to examine the question.

The Democratic Alliance (DA), favorable to businesses, the second party of the Government of National Unity (GNU), says it is “firmly opposed” to the law and consults its lawyers.

He claims that even if he supports legislation relating to the restitution of land, he disputes the process followed by the country’s parliament to promulgate this law.

The Freedom Front Plus, a party which defends the rights of the white minority and which is also part of the GNU, is committed to contesting the constitutionality of the law and doing “everything that is in its power” to have it amended if It turns out to be unconstitutional.

One of the party’s friction points was the potential threat that the law posed to private property.

Apart from the coalition government, the fighters of economic freedom, known for their radical opinions on nationalization and the distribution of land, qualified this decision as “legislative evidence” on the part of the ruling party.

The party also affirms that the law will not help resolve the controversial issue of land restitution in South Africa.