The outcome of the ANCs long-awaited KwaZulu-Natal conference was a win for the Thuma Mina crowd. (Delwyn Verasamy/M&G)
PARLIAMENT, May 26 (ANA) – The Expropriation Bill is expected to land on President Jacob Zuma’s desk soon after the National Assembly on Thursday adopted changes to the controversial law.
The bill, which sets out the legislative requirements for the State to lay claim to land for public purpose or in the pubic interest, was passed after ruling ANC and some opposition parties MPs voted in favour of the bill, which was slightly amended by the National Council of Provinces (NCOP).
The Democratic Alliance (DA) opposes the bill on the grounds that the term “property” in the bill was not defined as referring to land only, meaning it was open to interpretation and could lead to movable property like shares and intellectual property be expropriated. One of the other problems, DA MP Anchen Dreyer said, was the fact that compensation for expropriated land would not cover outstanding bank payments, meant property owners could be left without money to find alternative accomodation.
The UDM also opposed the bill, insisting that while land could be expropriated for restitution purposes, those who were dispossessed of their land prior to the 1913 Land Act would not benefit.
The National Assembly accepted changes made by the NCOP. The changes were largely technical in nature.
The bill would now be sent to Zuma to sign into law. It sets out the rules by which the government can expropriate land “in the public interest” and “for public purpose”.
While land owners would be paid compensation, the State would not merely rely on “market value” to determine the rand amount to be paid.
Other criteria include the “history of the acquisition”, “the current use of the property”, and “the purpose of expropriation”.
Land owners would also be able to approach the courts should they not be happy with the compensation paid.
– African News Agency (ANA)
Disclaimer: This story is pulled directly from the African News Agency wire, and has not been edited by Mail & Guardian staff. The M&G does not accept responsibility for errors in any statement, quote or extract that may be contained therein.