Land remains at the core of economic, social and political struggles in southern Africa.
The historical dispossession of land from black communities during colonial and apartheid rule created deep-rooted structural inequalities that persist today (Werner, 1993).
The recent signing of South Africa’s Expropriation Bill by president Cyril Ramaphosa has reignited debates on land reform, economic justice and the power of the state to address historical injustices.
The Expropriation Bill provides a legal framework for the state to expropriate land, including instances where compensation may be nil in the public interest (News24, 2025).
This move has been both celebrated as a tool for redress and criticised for its potential implications on property rights and investor confidence.
For Namibia, which continues to grapple with untransformed land ownership patterns more than three decades after independence, South Africa’s approach offers critical lessons on how state power can be strategically leveraged to address inequalities and structural poverty.
South Africa’s Expropriation Bill: Context, implications
The Expropriation Bill replaces the outdated Expropriation Act of 1975, aligning expropriation laws with South Africa’s constitutional framework (Government of South Africa, 2025). The law acknowledges that expropriation is just one mechanism to accelerate land reform, particularly in cases where willing-seller, willing-buyer models have failed.
The Bill was met with strong opposition from political parties such as the Democratic Alliance (DA), Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP), and Freedom Front Plus (FF+), reflecting broader concerns about economic stability and property rights (News24, 2025).
Supporters of the law, including the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), argue that the state must be a key driver in redistributing land and ensuring that land reform benefits those historically excluded from land ownership. Dr Ndlozi of the EFF emphasises the role of state power in shaping economic transformation, warning against governance structures that allow elites to exploit resources while the majority remains in poverty. His argument echoes broader concerns about the failure of post-apartheid governance to meaningfully change ownership patterns in key sectors of the economy (Ndlozi, 2025).
Lessons for Namibia
Despite its political independence in 1990, Namibia remains one of the most unequal societies in terms of land ownership. At independence, over 70% of the country’s agricultural land was owned by white commercial farmers, a demographic representing less than 5% of the population (Adams & Werner, 1990). Today, these figures have barely shifted, as land redistribution efforts remain slow and largely ineffective (Ministry of Agriculture, Water, and Land Reform [MAWLR], 2021).
Revisiting land acquisition models
Namibia’s reliance on the willing-seller, willing-buyer model has proven ineffective in redistributing land equitably (Harring & Odendaal, 2012). South Africa’s shift towards expropriation, with or without compensation, suggests that the Namibian government may need to explore similar legal instruments to accelerate land reform. While expropriation without compensation is a contentious issue, it is a necessary consideration in addressing historical injustices and ensuring equitable land ownership.
Strengthening the State’s role in economic redistribution
The Namibian state remains the most powerful tool for addressing land inequality. As Dr. Ndlozi notes, the Afrikaner nationalist government used state mechanisms to empower their people, ensuring land ownership, infrastructure development, and economic self-sufficiency (Ndlozi, 2025). In contrast, contemporary African governments, including Namibia, have struggled to use state power for long-term socio-economic transformation. The key lesson is that the state must be wielded as an instrument of structured empowerment rather than short-term elite accumulation.
Regulating absent landlords, underutilised land
A significant proportion of Namibia’s commercial farmland is owned by absent landlords, many of whom neither reside in the country nor actively contribute to agricultural production (Namibia Agricultural Union, 2020).
This situation mirrors South Africa’s challenges, where large portions of land remain unproductive while the landless poor struggle to access fertile land. Implementing land-use policies that prioritise active and productive use of land, including penalties for underutilisation, could ensure that land reform delivers tangible economic benefits.
Beneficiaries’ post-settlement support
One of the critical failures of Namibia’s land reform process has been the lack of post-settlement support. Many beneficiaries of land redistribution struggle due to inadequate access to capital, training, and infrastructure (MAWLR, 2021). South Africa’s approach to expropriation must be complemented by comprehensive support mechanisms to ensure that resettled farmers become productive contributors to the economy. Namibia must learn from this by integrating agricultural finance, market access, and training into its land reform strategy.
Balancing land reform with economic stability
Critics of expropriation without compensation argue that it could destabilise property markets, deter investment, and threaten food security. However, well-managed land reform can strike a balance between redress and economic stability.
Policies must ensure that land redistribution does not lead to economic collapse, as seen in Zimbabwe’s fast-track land reform programme (Moyo, 2013). Instead, structured land expropriation, with clear economic and developmental objectives, could drive sustainable transformation.
The State as an instrument of justice
The South African Expropriation Bill signals a shift towards a more assertive land reform policy, reflecting growing frustrations with slow progress in addressing historical inequalities.
For Namibia, this moment offers a crucial opportunity to reassess its land policies and the role of the state in transforming the economy.
Land reform is not merely about redistributing hectares of land – it is about restoring dignity, ensuring economic participation and breaking the cycle of structural poverty among black communities.
If Namibia fails to use state power effectively, it risks perpetuating the same inequalities that defined the colonial and apartheid eras.
The challenge is clear: will the Namibian state act boldly in the interest of the majority, or will it continue to uphold an economic structure that benefits the privileged few?
*Lot Ndamanomhata is a graduate of Public Management, Journalism and Communication. This article reflects his views and writes entirely in his personal capacity.