South Africa Legalizes Land Seizures Without Pay

A Blow to Property Rights

South Africa has entered a frightening chapter in its history. On January 23, 2025, President Cyril Ramaphosa signed into law the Expropriation Act, officially legalizing expropriation without compensation. While some view it as a move to rectify historical wrongs, the legislation has raised significant concerns about its impact on property rights, the economy, and the rule of law.

The Vague Terms of the Expropriation Act

The Expropriation Act of 2025 replaces the Expropriation Act of 1975, which restricted expropriation to public purposes such as infrastructure projects, with compensation based on market value. The new law, however, introduces sweeping changes. It allows for expropriation for both "public purposes" and "public interest," a term broadly defined to include land reform and the rectification of historical injustices.

The government claims the Act aligns with Section 25 of the Constitution on property rights and land reform. But its vague language opens the door for abuse, allowing the state to seize private property with little accountability.

Expropriation Without Compensation

The most contentious aspect of the new law is its provision for expropriation without compensation under specific conditions. To put it bluntly, the government can seize land without paying for it if is considered:

Speculative Land: Properties held without immediate plans for productive use.
Abandoned or Unused Land: Land deemed underutilized or idle by the state.
Public Benefit Land: Areas occupied by informal settlements or deemed necessary for public interest.
State-Owned Land: Transfers between government entities without compensation.

These provisions extend beyond rural or agricultural land. They apply to residential, commercial, and industrial properties, effectively putting any privately owned land at risk.

Redefining “Fair Compensation”

While the 1975 Act relied on market value as the primary measure of compensation, the new law incorporates additional criteria. Fair compensation now depends on factors such as:

Current Use of the Property: Is the owner "fully utilizing" it?
History of Acquisition: A focus on how and when the property was obtained.
Purpose of Expropriation: A subjective assessment tied to socio-economic goals.

This redefinition introduces significant uncertainty for property owners. For instance, a homeowner with a large yard might face expropriation if the state deems the space better suited for low-income housing.

Lessons from Zimbabwe

South Africa's new land reform policy mirrors aspects of Zimbabwe's efforts, which led to severe economic decline.

Uncertainty regarding property ownership and rights fueled illegal occupation, with squatters often occupying land in anticipation of future expropriation. The Prevention of Illegal Eviction Act further complicated the situation by limiting landowners' ability to remove illegal occupants, potentially accelerating the growth of informal settlements and subsequent expropriation.

Moreover, the forced redistribution of land from white commercial farmers, often to individuals without the resources or experience to manage it, led to agricultural collapse, hyperinflation, and a significant decline in productivity.

Broader Implications for South Africa

The economic ramifications of the Expropriation Act of 2025 are set to be profound. Foreign investment, already fragile, could decline further as confidence in property rights erodes. Locally, businesses and individuals may become increasingly reluctant to invest in land and infrastructure, leading to a slowdown in economic growth.

On a broader scale, the law has the potential to deepen existing social divisions. By framing expropriation as a tool for redress, the government risks exacerbating polarization among communities, potentially undermining efforts to foster unity and collaboration.

Political Fallout

The legislation has reignited criticism of South Africa’s Government of National Unity (GNU), a coalition that includes both the ruling African National Congress (ANC) and opposition parties like the Democratic Alliance (DA) and Freedom Front Plus (VF+).

Initially welcomed as a promising step toward inclusive governance and national stability, the GNU aimed to address South Africa's challenges collaboratively. However, the involvement of opposition parties has facilitated the passage of controversial laws, such as the Expropriation Act of 2025, raising concerns about whether the coalition has inadvertently strengthened the opposition parties' agenda.

A Critical Juncture for South Africa

The Expropriation Act represents a critical turning point for South Africa. The legislation threatens to severely undermine property rights, a fundamental pillar of any stable economy. South Africa risks unleashing widespread economic instability, eroding investor confidence, and diminishing private ownership.

The nation now stands at a crossroads, facing the profound consequences of sacrificing property rights for political expediency, potentially destabilizing the very foundations of its economic future.

Willem Petzer

Journalist | Commentator | Opinion Maker