Both of the parliamentary committees dealing with the expropriation without compensation (EWC) bills have ‘breached their constitutional obligations to ‘facilitate public participation’ in the legislative process.’ This is according to the Institute of Race Relations (IRR).
The IRR has called for both committees to start afresh and to also ensure that proper socio-economic assessments (as required by law) are performed to determine the impact of the proposed legislation.
The Portfolio Committee on Public Works and Infrastructure, which is the body responsible for the Expropriation Bill, has received tens of thousands of submissions in the past few weeks and is unlikely to have given all of these the consideration necessary, the IRR believes. Despite this it is going ahead with oral presentations next week.
Said IRR project manager, Terence Corrigan: ‘In rushing ahead in this way, the Portfolio Committee is ignoring Parliament’s constitutional obligation to “facilitate public participation” in the legislative process. It is also overlooking a number of Constitutional Court judgments which emphasise that a tick-box attitude to public consultation is not enough.’
The IRR also believes that the Ad Hoc Committee charged with drafting an EWC constitutional amendment bill has also failed in terms of public consultation. The committee received over 204 000 written submissions by the end of February 2020, and as yet has not read all submissions. After a previous refusal to hear oral presentations, the committee has now agreed to the hearing of presentations. However, it refuses to let the process extend beyond the 25th of March – irrespective of how many oral submissions might be excluded.
Says Corrigan: ‘Both committees have set short time lines for the public participation process and now regard their self-imposed deadlines as more important than their constitutional obligations. Yet the Constitutional Court has stressed that it is “the timetable that must be subordinated to the rights guaranteed in the Constitution, and not the rights to the timetable”.
‘Both committees need to draw back, recognise the deep flaws in their public consultation processes, and start afresh. Moreover, if the public is truly to have an opportunity to “know about the issues”, as the Constitution requires, both committees should ensure that the country’s most knowledgeable and experienced economists are commissioned to conduct a comprehensive socio-economic assessment (SEIAS) of the likely costs and consequences of EWC – especially in South Africa’s straitened economic circumstances.’
Corrigan also warned that any failure to address the socio-economic consequences of EWC legislation would result in South Africa suffering an economic collapse similar to those which happened in Venezuela and Zimbabwe, as investment dried and skills and capital fled.
The IRR urged both committees to start afresh by securing comprehensive socio-economic impact reports on the potential consequences of the bills and working towards removing an ill-advised ideological commitment to state ownership and control.