By Akani Nkuna
Sakeliga has announced its strong opposition to the Expropriation Act, vowing to challenge the legislation through legal and advocacy efforts to protect property rights and prevent government overreach in expropriation matters.
Sakeliga CEO Piet le Roux claimed on Tuesday that the Act aimed to help the government significantly expand expropriation, often without compensation or at non-market rates, to increase state property ownership.
He said it encouraged lawlessness in a country already facing high crime rates and land grabs. This threatened South Africa’s economic stability and violated the Constitution, and, therefore, must be opposed.
“Publicly, these acts are defended with an appeal to the public interest and supporting flourishing black communities, but in practice, the proceeds of this economic extraction are enjoyed at public expense by a limited, government-connected group. As a consequence – and given the integrated nature of the economy – virtually everyone is harmed through a colour-blind negative multiplier effect,” he said in a statement.
Founded in 2011, Sakeliga is a South African business organisation advocating for free markets and a stable constitutional order to drive economic growth. Representing over 12,000 members, it actively challenges policies such as the Employment Equity Amendment Act and the National Health Insurance Act through litigation.
It opposes BEE and race-based hiring, arguing for a business environment focused on value and competitiveness.
“Besides litigation, Sakeliga will continue implementing its strategy of developing alternative structures to failing state institutions.
“These include promoting an alternative and sound ethical basis for resisting harmful state intervention through maximum appropriate non-compliance, deepening our relationships with international trading partners to encourage appropriate policy responses, and supporting local business chambers to ensure public and private property is protected in urban and rural communities across the country,” said Le Roux.
Sakeliga’s initial legal challenge aims to remove key clauses from the Act that it says enables unjust expropriation and non-market compensation. It argues these provisions violate Section 25 of the Constitution by allowing “nil” compensation and disregarding crucial factors in determining compensation.
“The Expropriation Act is neither necessary nor actually intended for finalising the restitution process. Moreover, it is not intended for transferring ownership of land to landless people. Rather, it proposes means by which the state can get its hands on more property and then use this to entrench its control over the economy and political and social life.
“Therefore, both state ownership of property will increase, and land frustrations will remain unresolved, leading to rising anger and chaotic land grabs,” said Le Roux.
Several groups, including AfriForum, the Democratic Alliance and the Solidarity Movement have vowed to take legal action against the legislation.
AfriForum has also said it will launch an international awareness campaign to highlight its concerns over the Act and garner support.
INSIDE POLITICS
