Land Reform – 2025 was the year that subjected the land reform programme to the most rigorous litmus test yet. The enactment of the Expropriation Act at the beginning of the year was the biggest highlight in the land reform space as it fulfilled the long standing constitutional requirement to repeal Prescription Act of 1975 whilst government also used its legislative machinery to partly accelerate the land reform programme. We have also observed the promulgation of this Act being used in certain quarters to fuel the already strained relations between South Africa and the United States government.
The Expropriation Act of 2024 replaced the archaic 1975 Expropriation Act and brought the country’s land reform policies into line with constitutional principles. The new Act introduced a transparent expropriation framework that balances land reform with legal safeguards and clarified compensation principles, strengthened legal protections, and introduced the dreaded Expropriation Without Compensation (EWC) clause under specific conditions.
The promulgation and gazetting of the Expropriation Act at the beginning of the year was deeply polarising. It saw some political formations filing court applications to challenge the constitutionality of the Act. The fierce opposition to the Expropriation Act was not limited to within the borders of South Africa – the backlash spilled over at the White House, where it drew the ire of the Donald Trump administration, which saw the Expropriation Act as an affront and evidence of a state-sanctioned drive to arbitrarily appropriate land along racial lines.
The fiery political rhetoric that has emanated from Washington has served to embolden and galvanise support against the land reform programme. On the international stage, the false narrative of white genocide spooked potential investment in the land reform programme and sullied the intentions of the state to address the racially skewed land ownership patterns in South Africa.
Despite the diplomatic stand-off between Pretoria and Washington, there was a glimmer of hope Minister Mzwanele Nyhontso made a commitment finalise and introduce the Equitable Access to Land Bill and the Communal Land Tenure and Administration Bill to Parliament. These would give impetus to the land reform programme by addressing long-standing legislative gaps and constitutional obligations regarding land redistribution and communal land tenure rights.
The Department of Land Reform and Rural Development in its briefing to parliament indicated that the proposed legislation will be tabled for public comment. It is now envisaged that this will happen during the first half of 2026. The full details are yet to be communicated.
In the Budget Vote in July 2025, the Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development (DALRRD) was allocated R9.820 billion, with R6.168 billion earmarked for Land and Tenure Reform and Restitution, to address these issues. This allocation included R559 million to acquire and allocate 44 000 hectares of land and a commitment to process long-outstanding labour tenant applications. These allocations signalled a recognition of the constitutional mandate to ensure equitable access to land and protect tenure security.
Despite over R52 billion been spent on land restitution, more than 5 700 land claims lodged before the original 1998 cut-off remain unresolved, with provinces such as KwaZulu-Natal, Limpopo and Mpumalanga experiencing the heaviest backlogs.
Agricultural Economists have identified that among the three elements of the land reform programmes identified in Section 25 of the Commission, redistribution of land experiences a higher rate than restitution of land and tenure of land. Reports show that 2.545 million hectares of land are held by The Proactive Land Acquisition Strategy programmes. These must be transferred to qualifying black South Africans with title deeds. This process will facilitate and enhance access to finance for the new land owners and further promote an enabling environment for partnerships with the private sector.
Several government reports have cited factors such as relying too much on manual systems and a lack of digitisation; poor coordination between the Department, the Commission on Restitution of Land Rights and other government players and programmes, CPAs and municipalities; inadequate post-settlement support; confused mandates between the Department and the Commission; and a lack of consequence management for ongoing underperformance – as some of the reasons behind the lacklustre performance of the land reform programme.
The reasons behind the slow delivery of land reform are not new. They mirror some of the key findings outlined in the 2017 Report of the High-Level Panel on the assessment of the legislation, also known as the Motlanthe Report. Similar sentiments were echoed by the Presidential Advisory Panel on Land Reform and Agriculture. Worryingly, there is little evidence to suggest that the institutional hindrances that the Panels identified nearly 10 years ago are being addressed.
Looking ahead
We are of the view that while the land reform programme may have been dealt a reputational blow by the baseless and spurious narrative of Afrikaner genocide, this setback can be used as an opportunity to change the narrative of land reform through efficiency and transparency. South Africa has a golden opportunity to use the land reform programme as a catalyst that can revitalise rural economies, create much-needed jobs, and stimulate entrepreneurship in rural communities. Some pockets of success have been achieved through partnership driven approaches to land reform as evidenced by Vumelana’s Community Private Partnership and various other similar interventions.
To scale these achievements, the state needs to follow up on its commitments, for example, by accelerating the establishment of the Agriculture and Land Reform Development Agency that President Cyril Ramaphosa raised in his state of the nation address in 2021.
In addition, the state should show more commitment to the land reform programme by addressing the competency gaps identified by the Motlanthe Report and the DALRRD’s own reports and implementing the recommendations of the panel. As an organisation that works at the coal face of land reform with claimant and beneficiary communities as well as private investors, we have been able to successfully apply tailored solutions such as the Communal Property Institution Support Programme, which supports the development of well-governed institutions for the implementation of settlement agreements and the building of partnerships, and the Transaction Advisory Support Programme to provide critical post-settlement support and advisory services to communal property institutions and investors to conclude community private partnerships.
Looking ahead, the litmus test for the Expropriation Act lies in its implementation. The devil is in the details and time will tell how the implementation of this piece of legislation will unfold. At the same time, any policy is as good as its implementation and the efficacy of the Expropriation Act, and the anticipated enactment of the Equitable Access to Land Bill and the Communal Land Bill, will hinge on the manner in which the provisions of the laws are implemented.
