Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors.

Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Cinnamon

South Africa passes bill aiming to return land to blacks

9 posts in this topic

South Africa’s parliament has approved a bill allowing the government to expropriate land in the public interest.

The new measure will allow a compulsory purchase of lands and give more ownership to blacks.

As a result of colonial dispossession and apartheid, 87 percent of South African land is owned by whites and only 13 percent by blacks.

The governing party ANC said the law would tackle injustices imposed by white-minority rule.
However, the main opposition Democratic Alliance opposed the bill.

According to the BBC South Africa, land is an emotive issue in the Southern African country 22 years after the end of apartheid.

<snip>

http://www.africanews.com/2016/05/27/south-africa-passes-bill-aiming-to-return-land-to-blacks/

@FalkeAuge

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Cinnamon  It is a very poorly and "open" bill / law.  It is even more poorly reported on by the freaking lopsided liberal media.

It is simply an unconstitutional piece of rubbish - which will assist in turning South Africa into another Zimbabwe!

Quote

<snip>

The Expropriation Bill of 2015 has finally been released by the Department of Public Works. The minister, Thulas Nxesi, wants it pushed through Parliament before year end. However, the 2015 Bill is just as unconstitutional as its 2013 predecessor.

The 2015 Bill again empowers both the minister of public works and all organs of state to expropriate property of virtually every kind, either ‘for public purposes’ or ‘in the public interest’.

Crucially, the Bill still seeks to allow any ‘expropriating authority’ to take property by serving a notice of expropriation on the owner. Ownership of the property in question will then pass automatically to the State on the ‘date of expropriation’ identified in the notice, which might be very soon after the notice of expropriation has been served.

In similar vein, the right to possess the property will automatically pass to the State on the relevant date in the notice, which could again be very soon after the transfer of ownership.

Like its predecessor, the 2015 Bill stipulates that the amount of compensation the State plans to pay must be included in the notice of expropriation. However, the current Bill breaks new ground by stating that an owner who objects to a second (not necessarily revised) offer of compensation from the State will be deemed to have accepted that offer if he fails to start court proceedings contesting the amount within 60 days.

Another new provision adds that, if a magistrate’s court (or the High Court) ultimately decides on a smaller amount of compensation than the Government has offered, the owner will have to pay the State’s legal costs. These costs will be deducted from the compensation owing to him, leaving only the balance, if any, to be paid to him.

In these circumstances, the expropriated owner – who may already have lost both ownership and possession of his property to the State – will need deep pockets to risk such litigation. He will also be given a mere 60 days in which to weigh the prospects of success, find legal representation, and issue summons. Most individuals will have no practical choice but to accept whatever the State offers.

Like its predecessor, the Bill seeks to empower the State to take property upfront – simply by notice of expropriation – while leaving it up to affected individuals to seek redress in the courts thereafter, if they can afford this.

<snip>

SOURCE

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, FalkeAuge said:

@Cinnamon  It is a very poorly and "open" bill / law.  It is even more poorly reported on by the freaking lopsided liberal media.

It is simply an unconstitutional piece of rubbish - which will assist in turning South Africa into another Zimbabwe!

 

I knew a lib wrote that when I saw it.  Looks like the president wants to sign it soon, too. Good vibes to you and your countrymen, we're all catching it from every direction. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Cinnamon said:

I knew a lib wrote that when I saw it.  Looks like the president wants to sign it soon, too. Good vibes to you and your countrymen, we're all catching it from every direction. 

 

It has been signed into law - yet it will be disputed and it will go to the constitutional court.

The sad fact is that if you research the real history of South Africa.  These black guys who now shout it is their land actually arrived after Jan van Riebeeck.  The KoiSan - are the actual indigenous people of the southern tip of Africa and they are totally marginalized by the the previous governments and even more so by the current lot. 

It's a mess - I tell ya!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, DarkKnightNomeD said:

Can we send OBAMA back to Africa? =3

NO there is not enough flesh for obama to eat in africa.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh so just as Zim, where Mugabe gave massive tracts of land to his cronies. Nothing changed but the skin color of the rich.

Quote

“There’s no one who disagrees with social justice, but instead we watched as land reform was used as a tool of political patronage,” said Peter Steyl, the head of the country’s commercial farmers’ union.

Zimbabwe’s white farmers find their services in demand again

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ukshep said:

NO there is not enough flesh for obama to eat in africa.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Restore formatting

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors.

Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker.