Should section 25 of the Constitution be amended to allow for expropriation without compensation, agricultural production output will “significantly decrease”, putting over US$10 billion worth of export revenue in jeopardy. That’s the view of Omri van Zyl, executive director of industry lobby body Agri SA, who told FTW the organisation was preparing its own legal strategy to oppose the validity of the Constitutional Review Committee’s recommendation that the constitution be amended. The national legislature has defended the process followed by the committee as “one of the most consultative [and] participatory” in South Africa’s democratic history. Van Zyl however strongly disagreed, pointing out that Agri SA had initially taken a softer approach, calling for “cool heads” to let the consultative process take its course. “We had extensive talks with government, proposing various land reform options that would ensure economic stability and food and production security,” said Van Zyl. He added that there was “no point” in holding a consultative process if government had already made up its mind. He reiterated Agri SA’s stance that it was “very keen” to drive the land reform process and to help fund it. “It has been proven in other countries that government-driven land reform is not successful and in fact leads to an economic decline. Agrarian reform needs to be funded and driven by the private sector in collaboration with government and international trade markets,” said Van Zyl. He said Agri SA had briefed its advocates and was now preparing its legal strategy. “We will leave no stone unturned to ensure sustainable local agricultural production continues,” said Van Zyl, echoing Agri SA president Dan Kriek’s earlier words that while the organisation believed in a consultative process it was now time to “draw a line”. Some of the arguments to be put forth in the legal battle include the fact that should the Constitution be amended, it would set a precedent that would allow any ruling government to change the Constitution as it saw fit. Another concern is that there is no clarity on the wording of the amendment and therefore how it could be interpreted. “If the Constitution is amended, the same contagion will spread to property rights. What happens to your second manufacturing plant or your beach house if there is political pressure to provide not only land but property?” said Van Zyl. And despite president Cyril Ramaphosa’s ongoing assurances to global investors, they continue to raise concerns, particularly around property rights. “The policy uncertainty around this issue has made investors very skittish,” he said. And without investment, food production would drop significantly, meaning not only would South Africa lose vital export revenue, it would mean importing food at much higher costs. “The poorest of the poor already spend 40% to 60% of their income on food. That would escalate if food prices skyrocketed,” Van Zyl said.
CAPTION
We will leave no stone unturned to ensure sustainable local agricultural production. – Omri Van Zyl
