By Lwamkelo Michael, B.TH Student – Seth Mokitimi Methodist Seminary
INTRODUCTION
Expanding on the topic of land reform in Africa as discussed by Eileen Wakesho earlier this week, this post by Lwamkelo explores the issue of land rights in South Africa. He reflects on contemporary trends such as land expropriation that continue to epitomise the dominant contextual forms of humanitarian discourse marked by historical dispossession and systemic exploitation. He draws on Biblical theological motifs on land to underscore the importance of current discourse within the South African socio-political and economic experience.
LAND FROM A BIBLICAL PERSPECTIVE
Hebrew Scriptures from time to time prove to us that land has been a key matter that connected people with Yahweh. In other words it was in the land that people had access to life in other words it was life giving. Land has also been something that people desired for and it is with this reason that when they were Promised Land they will propel towards it. The land somehow provided people of God to have an intimate relationship with their creator. Hebrew scriptures informs us that land has been something natural in other words it was seen , it was touched unlike the New Testament understanding of land which was supernatural. The book of Genesis takes us to an individual who is Promised Land and later that promise is shared by descendants. We are told about requirements that were to be met by those who were to acquire land. Land gave life and this challenged people to obtain and take care of it. It is important to highlight that land somewhere somehow became problematic.
Walter Brueggemann writes, “land will be used to refer to actual earthly turf where people can be safe and secure, where meaning and well-being characterized by social coherence and personal ease in prosperity security and freedom” (Brueggemann 1977 :2). Biblical theology informs us that land has been central for the people of Israel — Israel was promised land through migration, seen through the lives of the patriarchs. “Israel is embodied in Abraham , Isaac , and Jacob in the earliest presentations as sojourners on the way to a land whose name it does not know” (Bruggemann 1977 :6). The interesting part about the land which was to be acquired was that it was also taken away from people who had owned it, and this raises a number of questions. We later see Israel entering Canaan and occupying land and owners of the land were left with nothing. Bruegemann writes “sojourner is a technical word usually described as resident alien, it means to be in a place, perhaps for an extended time, to live there and take some roots , but always without rights , title or voice in decisions that matter” (Brueggemann 1977 : 7). It is clear that the sojourner ended up being harmful to some, while others rejoiced in the experience. The land issue is always experienced differently there has never been a time where all were satisfied. The unhappiness of others soon pushed them to rebel against the system which they felt was against them.
THE LAND STRUGGLE IN SOUTH AFRICA
The issue of land in South Africa remains a huge challenge. The historical narrative of South Africa reveals deep-rooted wounds that have been caused by land grabs and deaths. Questions quickly take us through these wounds. Notably, “to what degree did apartheid victimize South Africans, specifically with regard to land?” (Gibson 2009 :53). The question above clearly indicates that apartheid caused extreme inequality in the country. “Historically white settlers in South Africa appropriated more than 90 percent of the land surface under the 1913 Natives Land Act , confining the indigenous people to reserves in the remaining marginal portions of land ” (Ntsebeza /Hall 2007 :3).
It is within these structures that people, mostly men, migrated to urban areas. The National Land Committee fought against the injustice system that oppressed black people and it challenged the system that ill-treated them. These were the words documented by the National Land Committee challenging the government, “the NLC rejects this style of unilateral restructuring and condemns the government for acting without informing, consulting or listening to affected communities who have already been made beggars in the land of their birth by the apartheid government” (Steyn 1994:1).
The way land was taken from indigenous people clearly indicates that their humanity was questioned, and decisions were taken without consultation. The National Land Committee shared the cries of the communities: “we need land , we need land for our cattle , we need land to plough , we need land for our children to live on , we need land to build houses – affordable houses, we need land for our gardens, and for the tenants living with us , we need water for the land” (Steyn 1994 :1). This system led black people to revolt. This kind of system was not new. It was used by the Canaanites in their struggle. They were the first to champion this revolution. Biblical theology takes us through different a model that was used by the Canaanites whose land was taken away from them in a brutal manner using military forces the so called conquest model. Gottwald explains the revolting model as follows , “in the last two decades , a revolt model has emerged in Canaan on the theory that Israel was composed in large part of native Canaanites who revolted against the overlords and joined forces with a nuclear group of invaders and or infiltrators from the desert”(Gottwald 1985 :272).
It is important to mention that there should be a way forward that will move the country to a better place. The key question that should guide us as people of the nation is, can we have an effective nation when there are old methods being used by people of the nation?. Do we need to practice land grabbing’s to move our country. The reality is that people of South Africa should seek ways that will assist its people in reconciling divided people. This is not an easy task it requires a lot and Gibson attests to this by saying “land seems to be an issue that will not be easily resolved in South Africa, since ultimately, it combines black demands for justice through economic redistribution with the expectation of symbolic reparations for the crimes and sins of colonialism and apartheid” (Gibson 2009:32 ). It will not be appropriate to say that people of South Africa should move forward without justice taking place if that is done proper negotiations should take place to deal with this matter. There have been campaigns taking place in the country people calling for the land to be back in the hands of black people. Ntsebeza takes us through those campaigns he writes , “the theme of the 2004 campaign was , Mawubuye Umhlaba Land Jobs , Food within this context the Secretary General of the SACP , Blade Nzimande , is reported as having threatened we will march to the departments of Agriculture , Land , Affairs and the Reserve Bank is support for accelerated land reform” (Ntsebeza 2007 : 107).
Politicians have shown their anger in addressing the issue of land. Different political parties share different sentiments on this matter. On the 08th of April 2018 Mr Julius Malema who is President of Economic Freedom Fighters addressing crowds on this matter said these words we want back our land our people are poor and land should be expropriated without compensation. This anger seems to be a way of paying revenge to what has happened in the past. Young leaders have experienced their concerns on this matter Andile Mngxitama a leader of the Black First Land expressed his anger saying these words, “we are setting up land expropriation committees across the nation , identifying white stolen land” (News 19 – 7 -2017 ). Mngxitama and his team were attacking those who were saying there should be proper channels in dealing with expropriation of land without compensation.
Views shared by these leaders are profound but the critic comes in when they want to deal with this matter in an appropriate manner. Actions of land grabbing should be condemned in a new South Africa fairness should rule to all those who were involved in it. Gibson writes, “fairness means giving land to those who were unfairly denied land in the past and taking away from those who may have profited from unjust enrichment under apartheid and colonialism” (Gibson 2009 : 191). In other words there should be a common understanding of the land issue. The National Land Summit of 2005 resolved, “the state should be proactive and be the driving force behind land redistribution” (Ntsebeza / Hall 2007 :15).
CONCLUSION
Cyril Ramaphosa seems to be the only President who has addressed the issue of land profoundly. He shared these words and I quote “no one is saying that land must be taken away from our people rather it is how we make sure that our people will have equitable access to land and security of tenure. That is how we will handle this, we must see this process of accelerating land redistribution as an opportunity rather than as a threat, I would like to invite all South Africans not to see this as a threat but an opportunity” (SABC News 20 :2018).
REFERENCES
Bruggermann , W., 1977. The Land. USA: Library of Congress Catalouging.
Gibson , J., 2009. Overcoming Historical Injustices. New York: Library of Congress Catalouging in Publication Data.
Gottwald , N., 1985. The Hebrew Bible. London: Library of Congress in Catalouging in Publicationn Data.
Miller D , Pope A , 2000. Land Title in South Africa. Cape Town: Juta /Co LTD .
Ntsebeza L , Hall R , 2007. The Land question in South Africa. Cape Town: HRSC Press.
Featured image source: https://www.istockphoto.com/