- Fifteen grassroots movements have been admitted as friends of the court in the constitutional challenge to the Expropriation Act.
- The cases were brought by the Democratic Alliance, AfriForum, and Die Vaderland Stiftung, who argue that the Act is unconstitutional.
- The movements believe the case will shape the future of land reform and the constitutional interpretation of expropriation in South Africa.
Fifteen grassroots organisations representing landless people, informal settlement residents, mining-affected communities, and housing justice movements have been formally admitted as friends of the court in the constitutional litigation concerning the Expropriation Act, currently before the Western Cape High Court.
The court granted the admission of the amici in all three constitutional challenges brought by the Democratic Alliance, AfriForum, and Die Vaderland Stiftung. These organisations are seeking to have the Expropriation Act No. 13 of 2024 declared unconstitutional.
The court has directed that written amicus arguments must be filed by 15 July 2026, with oral arguments scheduled for the main hearing, which is expected to take place in August 2026.
In a statement released after the ruling, the coalition said the decision ensures that communities affected by land dispossession will be heard directly in the case. “This decision ensures that the voices of landless communities and social movements will be heard in a case that will shape the future of land reform in South Africa,” the movements said.
Background to the constitutional dispute
The Expropriation Act was signed into law on 23 January 2025 by President Cyril Ramaphosa. The legislation was introduced to modernise South Africa’s expropriation framework and align it with the Constitution’s commitments to land reform, restitution, and equitable access to land.
Shortly after the law was enacted, the Democratic Alliance, AfriForum, and Die Vaderland Stiftung launched constitutional challenges in the High Court seeking to invalidate the Act.
According to the challengers, the parliamentary process that produced the legislation was flawed. They also argue that certain provisions undermine the constitutional right of access to courts and contend that expropriation without compensation is unconstitutional.
Arguments the movements plan to advance
Through their intervention, the coalition of movements intends to present arguments in support of the constitutionality of expropriation within the framework of Section 25 of the Constitution.
“Compensation is not a precondition for expropriation, as confirmed by established jurisprudence,” the movements said. They also argue that the constitutional standard for compensation cannot simply be reduced to market value.
“Just and equitable compensation does not mean market value, particularly where historical injustice is involved,” the coalition said. According to the organisations, there are circumstances where zero compensation may be constitutionally appropriate. “Nil compensation may be constitutionally appropriate in specific circumstances,” the movements said.
They also argue that land reform must move forward alongside stronger protections for communities living with insecure tenure and customary land rights.
A broader debate about land justice
The coalition maintains that the constitutional debate on expropriation should not be confined to defending the Expropriation Act alone. “The constitutional debate on expropriation must not be reduced to a narrow legal defence of the Expropriation Act alone,” the movements said.
Instead, they argue that the litigation should open up a broader national conversation about how expropriation can promote justice while protecting poor and working-class communities. The organisations also emphasised the need for stronger protection of communal tenure and customary land rights, particularly for rural communities and areas affected by mining displacement.
They further proposed the creation of an independent Land Ombudsman to investigate abuses and ensure that expropriation powers are not used against poor or marginalised communities.
Activists gather outside the Western Cape High Court
Community organisations also acknowledged a protest organised outside the Western Cape High Court during the amicus hearings held on 2 and 3 March 2026. Activists, residents, and community leaders gathered outside the court building in Cape Town during the proceedings.
“The presence of activists, residents, and community leaders sent a clear message. Land justice cannot be decided in courtrooms without the presence of the people whose lives are most affected,” the coalition said.
The organisations also praised the mobilisation organised by the Housing Assembly and allied groups. “The mobilisation ensured that this case was not merely a legal dispute between elite institutions, but a people’s constitutional struggle,” the statement said.
A defining moment for land reform
The main constitutional hearing scheduled for August 2026 is expected to be a defining moment for South Africa’s land reform journey.
In the months leading up to the hearing, the coalition says it will step up public education on the Expropriation Act and mobilise communities across the country. “This case is not only about the Expropriation Act,” the coalition said.
“It is about whether South Africa’s Constitution will continue to serve as a framework for transformation, restitution, and justice, or whether it will be narrowed to protect historic patterns of property inequality.”
They say the admission of the movements as friends of the court ensures that the lived realities of landlessness and housing insecurity will now be placed before the judiciary. “The struggle for land justice continues,” the movements added.
Get your news on the go. Click here to follow the Conviction WhatsApp channel.
