[imagesource:here]

Last year, on October 9, the Department of Public Works and Infrastructure published the Expropriation Bill B3-2020.

That bill had undergone a series of amendments, and remains one of the most debated and contested pieces of legislation in recent times.

Bulelwa Mabasa, a member of the president’s Land Reform Advisory Panel, along with other government figures, have consistently sought to reassure the country that the bill won’t lead to a situation like that we have seen play out in Zimbabwe, but many remain fearful.

Based on the Expropriation Bill B3-2020, Moneyweb has written a superb explainer of the expropriation and compensation processes envisaged in the bill, starting with the three phases:

1. Investigation and valuation phase

An expropriating authority (EA) must first ascertain the suitability of a property for the purpose of the expropriation and must establish the extent of the registered and unregistered rights therein. The EA may inspect, survey and valuate the property.

2. Notice and consultation phase

The EA must serve a notice of intention to expropriate on the owner and any known holder of a right in the property. At this stage, ownership has not passed to the EA. This notice must explain the purpose of the expropriation, the reason why that particular property was chosen, and the date of the expropriation.

This stage allows for objections to the expropriation, as well as allowing the property owner to challenge whether an amount is “just and equitable compensation”.

3. Expropriation and compensation phase

If the EA proceeds with the expropriation, it must serve a further notice, which must include the amount of compensation offered or agreed to, and a statement that the owner may institute court proceedings to dispute the amount of compensation within 180 days of the date of expropriation.

Moneyweb’s article unpacks each of the above in greater detail, and also breaks down how a compensation amount is settled on.

Finally, there are five specific circumstances where zero compensation (the dreaded ‘land expropriation without compensation’ part) is deemed ‘just and equitable’:

• Land is held for speculative purposes;
• Land is held by an organ of state and is not being used for its core functions;
• Land has been abandoned;
• The market value of land is less than the state investment or subsidy in the acquisition of the land; or
• The land poses a health, safety or physical risk.

As things stand, comments on the bill have closed, and the country now waits for the next version, which may contain amendments to the bill presented last October.

Over the past week, the Portfolio Committee on Public Works and Infrastructure has held virtual public hearings where bodies such as Business Unity South Africa and Free Agriculture SA (FSA) have argued against the bill in its current form, saying it would undermine investor confidence.

Here’s more from FSA’s Jack Armour, via News24:

He said, should expropriation without compensation (EWC) laws be enacted, it would be disastrous for the country.

“EWC enacted will be a drain to the fiscus on legal battles more costly than just buying the land. A destruction of all property rights will cut us off from the developed world and leave us at the mercy of unreliable politicians for just and equitable land allocation. This will lead to instability, uncertainty and job losses.”

If you want an idea of the various fears and arguments against the bill from the general public, you only need to read the comments on the Moneyweb article.

Despite the pushback in those virtual hearings, it is expected that Parliament will adopt the bill.

[sources:moneyweb&news24]