Alternative to controversial expropriation bill proposed

The Expropriation Bill of 2015, recently put forward by public works minister, Thulas Nxesi, (the Nxesi Bill) will make it much harder to build prosperity and overcome past disadvantage by undermining property rights, deterring investment, and choking off growth and jobs, warns the Institute of Race Relations (IRR).

The IRR has therefore developed an alternative expropriation bill with many advantages over Nxesi’s one, says Dr Anthea Jeffery, head of policy research at the institute.

The IRR’s alternative bill deals with all the defects in the current Expropriation Act of 1975. By contrast with the Nxesi Bill, it is also fully in line with the constitution.

Says Jeffery: “Like the Nxesi Bill, the IRR’s measure allows expropriation ‘in the public interest’ as well as ‘for public purposes’. It also says that market value must be weighed against the four ‘discount’ factors listed in the Constitution in deciding what is ‘just and equitable’ compensation.”

The IRR’s measure also says that:
•  the state must obtain a High Court order confirming the constitutional validity of a proposed expropriation – and the adequacy of the compensation proposed – before it issues a notice to expropriate any property;
•  the compensation payable must also include damages for consequential loss resulting from the expropriation, from moving costs to any loss of future income; and
•  all the compensation due must be paid before the state takes ownership of the property, failing which the notice of expropriation automatically becomes invalid.