Legal Conflicts in South Africa's Expropriation Act Questioned by Minister Macpherson

The controversy surrounding South Africa’s newly signed Expropriation Act reached new heights as Dean Macpherson, Minister of Public Works and Infrastructure, criticized the legislation for containing what he described as contradictory procedural mandates that threaten its constitutional validity.

During a media briefing last Saturday, Macpherson, accompanied by John Steenhuisen, leader of the Democratic Alliance (DA), outlined their concerns regarding the new act, which they believe infringes on property owners' rights through conflicting clauses. Their commentary follows President Cyril Ramaphosa’s recent approval of the act, which has sparked widespread debate across the nation’s political spectrum.

Macpherson highlighted specific sections of the Act, particularly pointing out the conflicts between Sections 7, 8, and 19. According to him, while Section 19 allows for the expropriating authority and the property owner to agree on a property value and suggests mediation if an agreement can't be reached, Sections 7 and 8 demand that this value determination should occur prior to issuing a notice of expropriation.

“This contradiction in processes is not merely a matter of interpretation but a serious legal flaw,” Macpherson stated. "You cannot have two contradictory methods of determining values in the same legislation. It undermines the very essence of lawful procedural conduct."

Further compounding the issue, Steenhuisen expressed his confidence that the Democratic Alliance would challenge the Act's implementation, emphasizing the need for legal clarity and respect for constitutional rights amidst these procedural discrepancies.

Macpherson also highlighted a lack of prior consultancy by the ANC before finalizing the act, describing the action as done in "bad faith." The minister stressed the potential repercussions of such unilateral legislative actions and underscored the need for mutual respect among governmental entities to prevent such incidents in the future.

The Expropriation Act has been presented as a tool to facilitate necessary land reforms and infrastructure development by enabling the government to perform expropriations under public interest, provided fair compensation is given. However, critics argue that the ambiguities and procedural conflicts within the act could lead to a breach of trust between property owners and the government.

As tensions continue to rise, the political and social ramifications are becoming increasingly apparent, with calls for a thorough review and possible amendments to ensure that the Expropriation Act aligns with South Africa’s constitutional mandates and public interest objectives.