South Africa Land Law Ignites Trump Controversy

Editorial: reda El ghazal

South Africa’s recent land reform legislation, which permits state expropriation without compensation under specific conditions, has ignited significant domestic and international controversy. President Cyril Ramaphosa defends the law as a necessary corrective to deeply entrenched historical land disparities, where the majority of agricultural land remains white-owned despite three decades of post-apartheid governance. The measure has provoked criticism from international figures such as Donald Trump and from South African center-right parties, who argue it poses a serious threat to property rights.

Legal analysts emphasize that uncompensated expropriation is intended only in exceptional cases—primarily for land reform or public interest purposes, such as ensuring access to essential resources. The law targets abandoned or speculatively held land, not productive farms, and even in these instances, existing infrastructure and improvements are typically eligible for compensation. When compensation is granted, the standard is no longer full market value but rather a “just and equitable” benchmark, consistent with the South African Constitution.

Despite its legislative passage, the law remains unenforced due to substantial political resistance and economic consequences, including reduced U.S. aid and the imposition of trade tariffs. Domestically, the Democratic Alliance rejects zero compensation but supports the equitable valuation principle, while some Afrikaner organizations, though opposed, minimize the risk of widespread farm seizures. With the policy suspended in practice, land reform continues to reflect unresolved tensions over inequality, justice, and national identity.