South Africa’s Land Inequality Persists Despite Decades of Reforms

Land ownership in South Africa remains a deeply divisive issue, with racial disparities persisting three decades after the end of apartheid.
White South Africans, who make up just 7.8 percent of the population, own 72 percent of the land, while Black South Africans, who constitute 81.4 percent, control only 4 percent, according to the 2017 land audit.
The roots of this inequality date back to the 1913 Natives Land Act, which initially confined Black South Africans to just 7 percent of the land.
This allocation was later increased to 13 percent under the 1936 Native Trust and Land Act.
Despite post-apartheid efforts to address these disparities, progress has been slow.
Since 1994, only 3.2 million hectares have been transferred to Black owners through land restitution, while 5.8 million hectares have been redistributed, representing less than 10 percent of South Africa’s commercial farmland.
The South African Constitution mandates land reform through restitution, redistribution, and tenure reform.
However, with land reform moving at a sluggish pace, the government recently took a more drastic step.
Last month, President Cyril Ramaphosa signed into law a bill allowing land expropriation without compensation under certain conditions, such as when land is unused, abandoned, or poses a risk to the public.
The move has ignited global controversy. Former U.S. President Donald Trump announced he would cut all future funding to South Africa, alleging that the government was confiscating land and mistreating certain groups.
In a statement on his platform Truth Social, Trump declared that funding would be withheld “until a full investigation of this situation has been completed.
” He later told reporters that South African leadership was engaging in “horrible things” and suggested that land seizures were just the beginning of deeper problems.
Ramaphosa swiftly dismissed Trump’s claims, emphasising that South Africa remains committed to the rule of law, justice, and equality.
He stated that the government had not confiscated any land and clarified that U.S. funding to South Africa primarily comes through the Pepfar health initiative, which supports HIV/AIDS programs and accounts for 17 percent of the country’s treatment efforts.
The U.S. allocated approximately $440 million in assistance to South Africa in 2023. Some critics, including billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk, have weighed in on the debate.
Musk, a South African-born businessman and Trump adviser, accused the government of discrimination against White landowners, asking Ramaphosa on social media, “Why do you have openly racist ownership laws?”
South Africa’s new land law has drawn comparisons to Zimbabwe’s controversial land seizures in the early 2000s, which led to economic collapse and investor flight. Critics argue that without proper safeguards, a similar fate could befall South Africa.
AfriForum, an organisation advocating for White Afrikaner rights, has called for amendments to the law to protect property rights, though it opposes Trump’s threat to cut funding. The group suggested that any punitive measures should target “senior ANC leaders” rather than the South African public.
South African Mineral Resources Minister Gwede Mantashe responded to Trump’s comments by suggesting that the country could withhold its mineral exports, including platinum, iron, and manganese, if the U.S. cuts financial assistance.
The African National Congress (ANC), led by Ramaphosa, governs South Africa in a coalition with nine smaller parties.
The party has long argued that land redistribution is necessary to correct historical injustices, but opposition parties and business leaders warn that the new law could destabilise the economy.
Trump previously criticised South Africa’s land policies during his first term, instructing then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to investigate reports of “farm seizures and expropriations and the large-scale killing of farmers.” At the time, the South African government dismissed his claims as misinformation aimed at sowing division.
By Nile Post.