Subscribe to our Newsletter


click to dowload our latest edition

Six myths about land reform

Published

on

OP-EDS

Parliament’s plans to change the property clause in our Constitution to allow the state to expropriate land without compensation (EWC) have stalled. However, a freshly drafted Expropriation Bill has recently been distributed for public comment.

One of the more alarming features of the Bill is a section that would allow the government to confiscate land without compensation “where the land is not being used and the owner’s main purpose isn’t to develop the land or use it to generate income, but to benefit from appreciation of its market value”.

Government alleges that EWC is necessary to restore land that was stolen during apartheid; to redistribute land so that home ownership matches racial demographics; and to appease an electorate that’s crying out for land.

President Cyril Ramaphosa not only claims that EWC won’t hurt the economy, but that it will bring more people into the fold by helping beneficiaries to become farmers. Before adopting such a radical policy at a time when our economy has been devasted by the pandemic and lockdowns, we should do some much-needed myth busting.

Myth one: land hasn’t been given back to its rightful owners

South Africa has a dark history of land theft. Justice requires that the wrongs of the past are addressed by awarding compensation to the victims of land dispossession. Over the past 25 years, the Land Claims Court has resolved more than 95% of the claims that have arisen. More than 1.8 million individuals have received compensation either in the form of land or money, and fewer than 3 500 claims remain unresolved.

Myth two: home ownership is skewed along racial lines

Amidst the cry for land reform is the claim that we need to have a more equitable distribution of land based on the country’s racial demographics. We should be suspicious of racial-demographic thinking because it’s exactly what the apartheid government specialised in. However, for those who are sympathetic to it, home-ownership data demonstrates that racial groups own homes in almost perfect proportion to their numbers.

Myth three: people are crying out for land

When South Africans are asked about the country’s most serious unresolved problems, almost 40% identify unemployment, 33% raise lack of service delivery, while less than 1% are concerned about land distribution.

When people win their land-claim cases, they are given the choice of receiving land or financial compensation. In 92% of cases, people choose money over land. This shouldn’t come as much of a surprise because money translates into freedom. Beneficiaries can use that money to start businesses, pay off debts, or invest in the market. The facts show that land isn’t a burning issue for ordinary citizens. It’s an issue being capitalised on by a few radicals with big loudhailers.

Myth four: anyone can be a farmer

The government spent more than R1.4 billion buying farms in the Eastern Cape to redistribute to aspirant farmers. Of the 265 farms purchased, only 26 remain viable. In 90% of those cases, once thriving farms that produced food and employment are now in ruin. Being a farmer isn’t easy. It’s a technical job that requires an enormous amount of time, expertise, and money.

Myth five: the Constitution impedes land reform

Section 25 of the Constitution provides a roadmap for land reform while ensuring that no one is arbitrarily deprived of property. It empowers the state to expropriate property in the public interest, which includes land reform. A classic case would be the construction of the Gautrain project, which needed to run through privately owned land; or the acquisition of land to build RDP (Reconstruction and Development Programme) homes. The Constitution recognises that in such cases, private owners deserve compensation and the following test is used:

The amount of the compensation and the time and manner of payment must be just and equitable, reflecting an equitable balance between the public interest and the interests of those affected, having regard to all relevant circumstances, including:

(a) current use of the property;

(b) the history of the acquisition and use of the property;

(c) the market value of the property;

(d) the extent of direct state investment and subsidy in the acquisition and beneficial capital improvement of the property; and

(e) the purpose of the expropriation.

Myth six: EWC won’t damage the economy

This is akin to saying that a vow of celibacy won’t affect your sex life. Unfortunately, life involves trade-offs. You can’t remove property rights and have a flourishing economy. Foreign investors won’t risk having their land confiscated in South Africa when they can pick any number of other nations that will protect their investments.

One doesn’t have to look at Chairman Mao’s Cultural Revolution or the horrors of Joseph Stalin’s regime to know how bad this idea is. When Robert Mugabe implemented EWC in Zimbabwe, it led to the world’s worst case of hyperinflation. It wasn’t just the original land owners that were hurt, the average man on the street was left destitute after the economy was annihilated.

What this means

Once the above myths about land reform have been revealed, the following becomes apparent. Almost all victims of land dispossession have been compensated. Home ownership matches racial demographics. Barring a few opportunistic politicians, almost no one views land reform as a burning issue. The transfer of functioning farms to ill equipped beneficiaries has been a spectacular failure. EWC has been tried in communist regimes around the world, and it has wrought riches for a few elites and devastation for everyone else.

  • Mark Oppenheimer is a practising advocate and member of the Johannesburg Bar.

*All statistics have been sourced from the Institute of Race Relations.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

OP-EDS

Our title deed to Israel was given by G-d

Published

on

Yom Ha’atzmaut is an opportunity to declare proudly and publicly our connection to Israel. This is our opportunity to remind ourselves and the world what Israel means to us.

We can draw our inspiration for this from a beautiful and powerful mitzvah bikkurim – the mitzvah for farmers to bring the first fruits of the harvest to the Temple in Jerusalem and dedicate them to G-d.

The Talmud paints a colourful picture of the farmers’ procession to the Temple as they brought the bikkurim. They didn’t arrive one by one in Jerusalem; rather, they would go up in a group, accompanied by music and a whole entourage to mark the occasion. At the head of the procession, there was a bull decorated in gold. And all the residents of Jerusalem – the shopkeepers and all the workers, sometimes even the king – would come out to greet the farmers. Upon arriving at the Temple, the Levi’im would sing a song from the book of Tehillim.

Then, on dedicating their baskets of produce to the Temple, the farmer would make a declaration summarising Jewish history and expressing gratitude to G-d for bringing the Jewish people to the land of Israel – to the sacred ground from which these first fruits were harvested.

Why all the fanfare? And how is any of this connected to Yom Ha’atzmaut?

One of our great sages, the Malbim, explains that the declaration on the bikkurim was a response to those who would challenge our right to the land of Israel. He cites Rashi’s very first comment on the Chumash – the question of why the Torah begins with the book of Genesis, the more narrative-driven portions of the Torah, when really the Torah is a book of commandments.

Quoting from a prescient midrash, Rashi explains that the reason the Torah begins with the story of creation is because one day, the Jewish people would be accused of unjustly appropriating the land of Israel, to which we can respond – G-d, the creator of the world, gave it to us. That is our title deed. And we underline this claim by publicly declaring and celebrating our connection to the land of Israel in the bikkurim ceremony.

There’s certainly a lesson we can draw on here in our own age about proudly and unapologetically celebrating our connection to the land of Israel.

But bikkurim has another – no less important – lesson for us for Yom Ha’atzmaut – the lesson of gratitude. Through the declaration, farmers express gratitude for the fact that G-d took us out of Egypt and brought us to the land of milk and honey from which the fruits were harvested. In this way, the entire farming experience becomes grounded in a deep appreciation. And the way we show our gratitude is by dedicating the best and the first to G-d through the mitzvah of Pidyon Haben, of redeeming a first-born son, and through the mitzvah of bikkurim.

Gratitude is at the heart of Jewish identity. The word “Jew” comes from the word “Yehudi”, derived from the name “Yehuda”, Leah’s fourth son. When she gave birth to Yehuda, she said, “I will give thanks to G-d.” As Jews, we know that everything we have, every blessing we enjoy, comes from our creator.

And so, as we mark Yom Ha’atzmaut this year, as we look back with satisfaction on all of the immense achievements of the past 73 years, our hearts are filled with gratitude and appreciation to G-d for His blessings that have made it all possible.

David Ben-Gurion, Israel’s first prime minister, is famous for having said, “In Israel, in order to be a realist, you must believe in miracles.” G-d’s miracles have accompanied the birth, growth, and development of the state of Israel throughout these 73 years. From the great military victories and economic and technological achievements, to the miraculous rebuilding of yeshivot and Torah learning on a grand scale beyond the wildest dreams of those who saw the destruction of these institutions in the Holocaust, the Jewish people have established, with G-d’s blessing, a thriving state in spite of all odds. Israel has, with divine help, continuously defied the natural order of things.

This Yom Ha’atzmaut, as we once again declare our historic connection to the land and celebrate all that our beloved state of Israel has miraculously accomplished, let us do so with deep gratitude and unabashed pride – and through this, let us unleash abundant divine blessings for many more years of greatness.

Continue Reading

OP-EDS

Beth Din works to make Pesach “lesstressingmoreblessing”

Published

on

The kosher department spends nearly six months of the year planning for Pesach and making certifications.

This year was particularly challenging with the sad and untimely passing of Rabbi Desmond Maizels in Cape Town. His care and knowledge added much to South African kashrut for many decades.

Various products available all over the country are manufactured in Cape Town. With the help of the Cape Town kosher team, we ensure that the highest standards are kept, and all essential items that the community needs are made available across the country.

This year, we launched a #lesstressingmoreblessing campaign, which we hoped would help make everyone’s preparation ahead of Pesach a little easier. We shared our expanded Green List, which is a list of products that don’t require a special Pesach hechsher.

We all know how expensive this time of year is and unfortunately, it’s costly for companies to manufacture Pesach items. In many cases – locally and internationally – the ingredients need to be changed, and factories often need to be closed for at least 24 hours to kasher production lines.

Furthermore, runs are often done in small batches and in most cases, production is done under the direct supervision of a mashgiach. We do what we can to research products all year round to add to our Green List to make it easier and more cost-effective to keep Pesach.

We then shared some delicious recipes from Romi Rabinowitz. Next, we created and shared helpful videos on kashering some of the latest kitchen appliances, which also enabled the community to meet some of the kosher team. Most importantly, we extended the hours of our kosher desk hotline to answer all the community’s questions.

Pick n Pay again printed our Pesach Guide, and innovated by placing a variety of Pesach-specific products on its Bottles app. This is something we hope to expand in the future.

What’s most important to us is community feedback. After Pesach, we reached out to the community via a survey, and got just less than 800 responses.

Here are the most pertinent:

•     Most of the community was happy with the product range available this year;

•     They prefer to buy locally-made products as it keeps costs down;

•     More than two-thirds of the community felt that the kosher department gave them useful information this year;

•     The Green List was found to be the most useful information shared;

•     There is a range of locally produced items that people would like to see available next year, namely: Orley Whip, sweets, cold drinks, diet drinks, chocolates, spices and sauces; and

•     Many expressed appreciation for our team, which we are grateful for.

The survey is now closed, so if you didn’t have the opportunity to respond to it, we invite you to contact us directly with your feedback.

We are grateful to everyone who completed the survey. We value the feedback and, with the positive and useful information given, we have already begun to plan for Pesach 2022. We hope we will keep you #lesssressingmoreblessing.

  • Rabbi Dovi Goldstein is the kosher managing director at the Beth Din.

Continue Reading

OP-EDS

Is the US losing interest in the Middle East?

Published

on

The United States-Saudi Arabia relationship is a really interesting case study for those who watch Middle Eastern geopolitics closely. Some background to current events is necessary to set the context.

On the one hand, Saudi Arabia is a difficult ally. Its human-rights record is suspect, to say the least. It was clearly responsible for the killing of the journalist Jamal Khashoggi in 2018, which caused a worldwide outcry. It has also been involved in a war in Yemen that has created a humanitarian disaster, with high civilian casualties and hunger, malnutrition, and illness in that country.

On the other hand, it’s a strategic US ally, and a stable, pro-Western country. It entered the war in Yemen for good reason – to prevent the Iranian-aligned Houthi forces from taking over the country. It was also the second biggest oil producer in the world in 2020.

President Joe Biden was left with a difficult choice. Heading up a Democratic administration, which supposedly prides itself on its support for human rights, he couldn’t leave things as they were. On the other hand, he couldn’t damage the US’s vital strategic and national interests. To this end, he seems to have attempted to walk a fine line by taking the following actions:

He released a redacted intelligence report that blamed the crown prince for being behind the murder of the journalist, but took no further action. He has made it clear that the US no longer supports the operations of the Saudi coalition in Yemen, and has temporarily paused the sale of offensive arms to Saudi Arabia, but has allowed the continued sale of defensive arms.

More importantly, he didn’t act when Saudi oilfields were once again attacked by Houthi missiles and drones on 7 March, which led to a spike in oil prices briefly above $70 (R1 021) a barrel.

The US said on the Monday that its commitment to defend Saudi Arabia was “unwavering”, and in a Twitter post, the US mission in Riyadh condemned the attacks, which it said demonstrated a “lack of respect for human life” and a “lack of interest in the pursuit of peace”. However, the US took no further action.

The main issue, however, which is being brought to the fore by the awkward US-Saudi dance, is that the US is losing interest in the Middle East. The area is much less of a priority than it used to be.

There are a few reasons for this. First, the US no longer relies on imports of oil from the region. Last year, according to The Economist, the US was in fact a net exporter of oil and natural gas.

Second, the US has been involved in long and endless wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that have cost trillions of dollars and achieved very little.

Finally – and this has been the policy across three US presidents now – the US wants to pivot to Asia and focus much more on countering a rapidly growing and influential China. It wants to lighten its burdens in the Middle East, and instead focus its energies on what everyone believes will be the world’s leading growth region of the 21st century.

This doesn’t mean the US will withdraw totally. It still has troops all over the area, and has vital interests in preventing a nuclear arms race there and not allowing terrorist groups to grow and find sanctuary. However, given recent events, it seems clear that it will scale down its activities and no longer expend the time and energy it has in the past. Its military activities will be curtailed.

The effect of this clear signal from the US has been dramatic, and it no doubt played a major role in the Abraham Accords and signing of peace treaties between Israel and the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain. If and when the Saudis join the emerging Israel-Sunni reproachment, it will no doubt also be due to the fear of less US involvement in the region and of therefore having to face their enemies alone.

While this development has been positive for Israel in that it now has new strategic allies in the region, bringing much more diplomatic strength and regional influence, in the long term, there must be concern.

The US moves towards Saudi Arabia are a portent for it becoming much less involved in the region, and clearly show its intention not to be dragged into any more wars there.

While Israel now has a lot of new allies as a result, and it seems the friendships will be warm, none of the new allies are major military powers. Local regional alliances, useful as they are, cannot replace the world’s main superpower, and an unstable region will surely become still more unstable without the US’s active presence.

Israeli leaders have long suspected this, but the fact that the US hasn’t responded militarily to the two recent attacks on the Saudi oilfields when in the past, under any president, there would have been a robust and strong response, shows how dramatically things have changed. The US can no longer be relied on as a military ally. Israel will be left to fend pretty much for itself if and when the next war breaks out in the Middle East.

  • Harry Joffe is a Johannesburg tax and trust attorney.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Naale Elite Academy

Trending