By Mkhululi Chimoio
Three decades after the transition to democracy, South Africa’s land reform process remains a central but contentious issue, a reminder of deep rooted Apartheid-era policies and the inequalities that these policies entrenched. With all the constitutional imperative and policies crafted to restore land to the dispossessed, millions of Black South Africans remain in limbo, awaiting secure land ownership and attendant economic opportunities.
At the center of conversations regarding land and historical injustices is the 2024 Expropriation Act, signed into law in January 2025, which grants the state the power to take land for public purposes or in the public interest — and, in certain cases, without paying compensation. It replaces the Apartheid-era Expropriation Act of 1975, with the stated aim of fast-tracking land reform and correcting the deep, unresolved injustices of dispossession.
Supporters see it as an overdue tool for dismantling one of Apartheid’s most enduring legacies: the concentration of land in the hands of a privileged few. Critics, however, warn that it opens the door to abuse, eroding property rights and undermining investor confidence.
The resulting debate has rekindled discussions of what justice, land ownership, and reconciliation mean in a country still haunted by its history.
Though there have been some success stories – beneficiaries who have been able to access and own land and engage in productive agriculture, others face serious challenges – ranging from administrative bottlenecks and judicial setbacks, to allegations of corruption and elite capture that threaten the programme’s potential for transformative change. This account negotiates the complex landscape of land reform in South Africa, presenting the different actors’ and systemic barriers’ perspectives alongside setting its course, and the broader implications for rural livelihoods, food security, and social cohesion.
Promoting transparency and delivery
In the vanguard of Parliamentary oversight over land reform is Mr. Mangaqa Albert Mncwango, Parliament Portfolio Committee Chairperson for Land Reform and Rural Development, charged with overseeing the Department of Land Reform and Rural Development (DLRRD) and connected entities.
Mncwango freely acknowledges the continuing delays hindering the pace of land reform and outlines measures to address them
“The Committee is demanding a ring-fenced budget to pay out pre-1998 claims so that there are dedicated funds to clear the backlog,” he states, adding, “We are also asking for more robust oversight mechanisms and the enactment of bills such as the Equitable Access to Land Bill to speed up land delivery while tightly watching corruption of funds.”
While he emphasizes that land reform is more than the matter of redistributing land, he also notes that constitutional obligations need to be harmonised, along with ensuring that the process does not just end with granting access.
“Land reform is consonant with our constitutional duty for access to land and food security”, Mncwango says. “Parliament”, he adds, “is attempting to ensure that beneficiaries are given post-settlement support that enables productive farming.”
Mncwango’s committee is also looking into allegations of elite capture, which is a controversial issue when discussing land. The grievances involved also need to be addressed meaningfully, starting with transparent beneficiary selection processes backed by legislation that he states is languishing in Parliament. He sees land reform as part of a holistic framework of agrarian reform in order to eradicate rural poverty in a sustainable way.
“Elite capture undermines the integrity of land reform”, he says. “We are resolved to end such practices through more transparency and accountability. Our strategy is holistic – empowering rural producers with access to land, water, and resources – and coordinated in government departments to bring about overall rural development.”
Outstanding claims
The Department of Rural Development and Land Reform confirms that as of March 2025 there are 5,407 outstanding old order restitution claims, with 288 finalised and 378 settled over the past year. These old claims, a spokesperson for the Department says, need to be resolved first before new ones can be addressed. Further, the redistribution is informed by a strict set of criteria, with public advertisement and open scrutiny by government panels any claims that such practice in land reform programs.
Regarding transparency in land redistribution, the department spokesperson asserted that the process is based on a strict set of criteria, with public advertisement and open scrutiny.
On its part, the Africa National Congress understands the frustration at delays but attributes this more to structural obstacles than political will. The ANC was the ruling party in South Africa since the onset of democracy in 1994, but is now part of a coalition government following the 2024 general election.
“The ANC acknowledges the delays due to structural bottlenecks and is in the process of critically reviewing policies to enhance delivery in accordance with the Constitution,” ANC National Spokesperson Mahlengi Bhengu-Motsiri says.
Defending the Expropriation Act, Bhengu-Motsiri states that the ANC stands for open beneficiary processes so that land actually benefits the dispossessed, stating, “The Bill is in alignment with the Constitution to facilitate land reform in the public interest, while protecting food security and investor confidence”
Opposition Voices: DA and AfriForum express concern
The Democratic Alliance (DA) is South Africa’s largest opposition party, but it joined the ANC in a coalition after the 2024 election. The DA’s Land Reform & Rural Development Portfolio Committee Chairperson, Bonginkosi Madikizela, has an alternative perspective.
“We are in favour of secure land ownership and tenure reform”, Madikizela says, “because we are of the view that it is instrumental in driving investment and job creation. We are against the Expropriation Act because it destroys investor confidence and economic stability.”
The DA is instead calling for more money to be spent to speed up land claims, calling for corruption to be addressed severely.
“Budgets need to be allocated on top of forensic investigations and co-operation with the private sector to root out corruption”, Madikizela adds further.
This opinion is shared by AfriForum, a South African non-governmental organisation dedicated to the advancement of Afrikaner interests.
“AfriForum supports legal restitution but fundamentally opposes expropriation without compensation as unconstitutional and against food security and economic stability”, AfriForum Head of Public Relations Ernst J. van Zyl says. “An effort must be made to address corruption in the existing restitution system. Farming is skill and hand-holding and not just land. Most claimants opt for cash payment.”
Structural challenges and policy gaps
University of the Western Cape Institute for Poverty, Land and Agrarian Studies (PLAAS) researcher Nkanyiso Gumede points out that political will and policy clarity are central to making progress. In his opinion, unless the reforms target smallholder farmers and the political class acts with urgency to address the matter, nothing much will change.
“Land restitution delays are due to a shortage of political will, shrinking budgets, and policies favouring commercial-scale farming at the cost of the poor,” Gumede says.
He also notes that there is no clear legislation to implement Section 25(5) of the Constitution of South Africa, which says that 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.
“Lack of clear Section 25(5) legislation provides the Minister with too much room for discretion, resulting in incoherent redistribution that leaves small-scale farmers out”, Gumede says, adding that the new Expropriation Act can set this right:
“The Land Reform Framework Bill can make equitable access to land functional”, he adds. “There are also laws that will secure tenure in the old homelands and an urban land reform policy to address spatial inequality.”
Regarding expropriation without compensation, Gumede comments, “While some fear it weakens property rights, it targets speculative or idle land with judicial monitoring, not arbitrary seizure. Expropriation by itself will not drive reform forward, however, unless accompanied by post-settlement assistance, prioritizing the poor, and secure tenure rights.”
Governance failures and exclusion of communities
Nolundi Luwaya, Land and Accountability Research Centre (LARC) University of Cape Town Director, speaks of governance failures that unmake the potential for land reform:
“Also at issue are the disregard of the Interim Protection of Informal Land Rights Act, over-reliance on customary leaders in communal land, and legislation for legislation’s sake without consulting communities. Policy must be reality-driven and crafted through cross-departmental engagement, drawing from the Motlanthe and Mahlathi reports.”
Luwaya warns against the risks of the Expropriation Bill, adding that it could further entrench already serious economic disparities in the country.
“It may lead to elite capture and exclusion if consulting the communities is eschewed”, she says, “especially where it concerns communal land. We advocate for free, prior, and informed consent of rural communities. Land reform should entrench the rights of the historically dispossessed, given top priority to tenure security, and implement laws like the Interim Protection of Informal Land Rights Act.“
Luwaya sees systemic exclusion, especially of women, as being a critical factor that needs to be addressed.
“Women’s voices are muted when it comes to making decisions about communal land. Policies must institute women’s spaces to participate and recognize that community decisions affect members differently and therefore require special protections for women and vulnerable groups. The state must protect communal rights and not enable traditional leaders against communities.”
Administrative inefficiencies and the way forward
The state owns 2.5 million hectares of land is owned by the state through the State Land Holding Account, but there are calls for its redistribution to black farmers, an opinion shared by AgriSA, CEO, Johann Kotzé.
“Private enterprise invests in development along with government extension officials to help new property owners”, Kotzé states. “Production of food has doubled in 30 years. If the 2.5 million hectares transferred were all in production, it would increase commercial farming and food security considerably.”
Professor Gustav Muller, a Department of Private Law Associate Professor at the University of Pretoria, attributes the failure by the government to act in response to these needs and challenges to administrative and legislative failings exacerbated by corruption.
“Delays stem from inefficiencies, under-resourcing, legislative loopholes, and corruption in the Land Claims Commission”, he notes, “depriving claimants of timeous justice.”
Despite this, Professor Muller is optimistic about recent legal advancements. “The Land Court Act 2023 brings a specialized court and mediation services for expeditious disposal of claims. But for durable gains, an unambiguous framework law on restitution, more funds, more personnel, and effective controls are needed.”
On expropriation, he sees the central issue being that many different stakeholders have their own readings of the situation, which have gone on to inform comments and public opinions in ways that have further complicated the issue rather than making things more clear.
“Government sees it as central to redress; Economic Freedom Fighters calls for broad expropriation; DA warns against economic risk. Civil society demands fair, open redistribution; commercial farmers oppose expropriation; small-scale farmers may welcome targeted expropriation with support. Traditional leaders and rural communities emphasise communal rights and consultation. Business insists on legal certainty to protect stability. Academics demand evidence-based governance, and international monitors refer to human rights norms” — Professor Gustav Muller, University of Pretoria
Grassroots realities, Political will, Elite capture
Siya Sithole, Strategy Manager at the Association For Rural Advancement (AFRA) identifies political will as one of the main obstacles.
“Although there are laws, there are simply not enough money and staff at the Department of Land Reform and Rural Development (DLRRD) to get things moving”, Sithole says. “In an effort to accelerate reform, government budgets and staff must rise exponentially based on actual land needs, not leftover budgets.”
He sees the Expropriation Act as a solution to the “willing buyer, willing seller” dilemma:
“Buying land at market price is untenable and unfair to taxpayers”, he says. “AFRA believes occupied portions under occupation by labour tenants need to be expropriated for lower compensation because the owners never put them to economic exploitation.”
In response to elite capture, Sithole admits that it has made the current situation worse, given how widespread it is, especially within Communal Property Associations and Trusts. “This, he notes further, “is due to mismanagement and abuse by those in office. The government should work on beneficiary capacity, enforce good governance of CPAs and Trusts, and finance the DLRRD and Master’s Office to ensure compliance.”
Sithole sees the more essential task at hand being that of improving livelihoods, rather than pursuing tenure in and of itself.
“Land reform must deliver structured government support and services”, he says in concluion. “The voices of women must take priority. It is an opportunity to create women-led, small-scale agro ecological agriculture, remaking food systems through justice and sustainability.”
Beneficiary selection
Dr Lennox Mtshagi, the National President of the Black Farmers Association of South Africa (BFASA), decries the process of selection and support for the beneficiaries, stating that the majority of those chosen were poorly selected, politically manipulated, and left without training or settlement support.
“Farming is a specialised occupation”, Dr Mtshagi states, “and the beneficiaries need education directed towards specific crops.”
He also points out the collapse of the Land Bank, a state owned enterprise that defaulted on its debt in April 2020, as a contributing factor. The bank had a mandate to support, promote and facilitate the development and transformation of the agricultural sector, and its failure to meet its obligations left farmers without the critical funding they needed.
“The collapse has deprived Black farmers of access to credit rendering development stagnant”, Dr Mtshagi adds. “BFASA is calling for a national vetting and regulatory body with farmer associations engaged in identifying, training, and developing genuine farmers for food security and meaningful empowerment.”
Legal barriers
Louise du Plessis, Head of the Lawyers for Human Rights’ Land, Housing and Property Programme, recognises that legal barriers exist that have limited the process of restitution.
“Legal conflict around nested rights, lack of post-settlement support, underfunded Commission on Restitution of Land Rights (CRLR), long litigation, corruption, and poor political will lead to delays”, she says, calling for a legally clear, coordinated, and properly funded approach to address these issues.
On expropriation without compensation, du Plessis notes, “While property lobbies and landowners oppose it for fear of rights and investment, landless individuals and civil society see it as long-overdue remedy for historical injustices, in accordance with the Constitution to enable large-scale redistribution, most notably of unused or previously-dispossessed land.”
Wilmien Wicomb, Land Lead at the Legal Resources Centre Programme, sees institutional challenges as being the main challenge in the way of restitution.
“Restitution languishes under a chronically under-funded Restitution Commission without systems and staff”, Wicomb says, “leading to lost claims and years of delay. The Land Court similarly does not have any permanent judges, hindering justice. Even transferred land far too frequently remains vacant due to lack of support after settlement.”
Regarding expropriation, Wicomb sees the Bill as being useful to address the challenges in land tenure, but only to some extent.
“The state has never had expropriation powers and is not under ‘willing buyer, willing seller'”, she says. “The new Expropriation Bill unbundles its use for land reform, as set out in the Constitution, but ability to act remains weak. Expropriation is a useful tool but no silver bullet.”
She sees the link between elite capture and corruption as being a more pressing challenge, saying, “A failure of open laws for open redistribution enables elite capture. The LRC is suing the courts to require public access to decisions in order for communities to challenge unequal allocations. Fighting corruption requires openness to reduce temptation to abuse. Transparency in decision-making with open information on recipients, pending claims, and available land avoids leaving behind vulnerable groups – women and farm dwellers – in land reform.”
Investigating corruption
Kaizer Kganyago, spokesperson for the Special Investigating Unit (SIU), identifies several key barriers to preventing fraud, especially in the land sector. These include a lack of institutional memory, difficulties in recovering documents, and the persistence of bribes.
“[SIU Investigations are reliant on anonymous witness accounts and interviews, subpoenaing suspects and banks, and searches of the premises”, he explains, adding that all this is done within the framework of the Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act.
SIU previously presented the names of 42 people for prosecution, including government officials, over large-scale fraud and corruption in South Africa’s land reform programme. A 7-year investigation between 2011 and 2017 into 148 projects exposed major systemic weaknesses and a lack of controls that enabled widespread abuse, with officials allegedly awarding farms and millions in grants to ineligible beneficiaries.
The investigation found that many of these beneficiaries failed to live and work on the land as required under the Land Redistribution for Agricultural Development Programme, indicating that there were clear shortfalls in the safeguards meant to prevent such abuses from happening in the first place.
For Melusi Ncala, Project Lead and Senior Researcher at Corruption Watch, the challenges are more structural. He points to a lack of political will to pursue corruption investigations, noting that government officials sometimes tamper with critical documents, such as title deeds.
Depending on the case, investigations might require tracing past ownership records, examining burial sites, and delving into historical archives. Ncala emphasises that the scale of the problem is severe. corruption in farmworker equity schemes has cost millions, with the government spending around R700 million on these initiatives. Corruption Watch has documented these cases extensively, producing evidence and podcasts that feature the voices of farmworkers, many of whom remain marginalised despite the schemes’ intentions.
A journey still underway
South Africa’s journey towards land reform is far from over.
While the country’s constitutional and legislative frameworks provide a strong basis for land reform, systemic backlogs, governance failures, elite capture, and corruption have stalled progress. Differing perspectives from lawmakers, opposition parties, academics, civil society, and affected communities highlight the challenge of balancing historical redress with economic viability and social justice. Mangaqa Albert Mncwango believes that with stronger oversight, dedicated funding, and new legislation, land delivery can benefit the long dispossessed while supporting food security and rural development.
For many still awaiting land and livelihoods, however, progress depends on open government, legal certainty, political will, an active civil society, and social involvement to turn the radical promise of land reform into a reality.
Mkhululi Chimoio is a South Africa-based solutions-oriented journalist and communications strategist, whose work spans investigative reporting, policy analysis, and advocacy—bringing nuanced insight and impact to both African media and diplomatic initiatives.
Add comment