Equality Court takes aim at Malema
Yesterday was not a good day for my patriometor; thoughts like “We’re the next Zimbabwe” circled around my paranoid scull like road vultures at the Atterbury explosion. Firstly, there was the announcement by the local mafia a.k.a. the ANC that all productive agricultural land may become a state asset. Read: we are the next Zim let’s get the hell outta here. And to be fair it’s not just plain ol’ female paranoia here – this crazy has stats. Well sort of
I saw a headline the other day that 90% of all farms purchased by the state with a view to land reform lies barren. (Would be useful if I could find a link to this article now, alas it alludes me.) This is in line with rumours on the topic that I’ve read/seen on television before and this is the case simply because any business is useless without the proper equipment (which also need to be maintained) and a budget to cover running costs. Government kinda let the ball drop (cough – again) on this small detail. Now they want to apply this success rate to all our food?! This is obviously not entirely accurate: rumours along these lines have been going around for a decade – this is just the first time that I’ve ever seen them look at how to go about it – namely changing Section 25 of our Constitution.
S25 reads as follows ( I know it’s long but it’s also important so take the minute to read it please. If you’re just not that dedicated, skip the blue bit):
(1) No one may be deprived of property except in terms of law of general
application, and no law may permit arbitrary deprivation of property.
(2) Property may be expropriated only in terms of law of general application–
(a) for a public purpose or in the public interest; and
(6) subject to compensation, the amount of which and the time and manner of
payment of which have either been agreed to by those affected or decided or
approved by a court.
(3) The amount of the compensation and the time and manner of payment must be just
and equitable, reflecting an equitable balance between the public interest and the interests of
those affected, having regard to all relevant circumstances, including-
(a) the current use of the property;
(b) the history of the acquisition and use of the property;
(e) the market value of the property;
(d) the extent of direct state investment and subsidy in the acquisition and beneficial
capital improvement of the property; and
(e) the purpose of the expropriation.
(4) For the purposes of this section-
(a) the public interest includes the nation’s commitment to land reform, and to
reforms to bring about equitable access to all South Africa’s natural resources;
and
(6) property is not limited to land.
(5) The state must take reasonable legislative and other measures, within its available
resources, to foster conditions which enable citizens to gain access to land on an equitable
basis.
(6) A person or community whose tenure of land is legally insecure as a result of past
racially discriminatory laws or practices is entitled, to the extent provided by an Act of Parliament,
either to tenure which is legally secure or to comparable redress.
(7) A person or community dispossessed of property after 19 June 1913 as a result of
past racially discriminatory laws or practices is entitled, to the extent provided by an Act of
Parliament, either to restitution of that property or to equitable redress.
(8) No provision of this section may impede the state from taking legislative and other
measures to achieve land, water and related reform, in order to redress the results of past racial
discrimination, provided that any departure from the provisions of this section is in accordance
with the provisions of section 36 (1).
(9) Parliament must enact the legislation referred to in subsection (6).
Except to say that a law of general application means a normal law that we all know and that Section 36 refers to the limitation of rights and the process one must follow to limit rights protected in the constitution, it’s all pretty straight forward. The thing is that this section allows for land reform on an equitable basis. So if they want to change it, it means nationalisation on an inequitable basis. Without beating around the bush, this sucks elephant bollocks. Especially if you add Honourable Comrade Malema to this equation who, like Zuma, is blatantly flaunting laws that are supposed to protect the poor and the well being of the economy in general by not playing open cards with their assets and how they come by them.
Why? Because we live in developing country which means that foreign investors are nervous. Political stability is the largest determining factor when they decide where to stash their loot. Current times already make for a low risk appetite. Thanks to our distinguished leaders for tarnishing our image just that little more so that China, India and the rest of the NDC’s have a bit better chance of getting those much needed and limited funds. Hope they’re getting a proper kick-back for this one.
On the upside, Malema got fined 50 g’s by the Equality Court for saying that the girl who accused Zuma of raping her enjoyed it. He’s appealing of course and even if he looses he’ll probably end up not paying it like all his traffic fines but it somehow made me smile anyway…for a second. Here is the big downer – there simply are no consequences for these people. None. Needless to say, this does not bode well for our future. And that’s being optimistic.

Cartoon Originally by Zapiro












