Had they done so, the legal Deprivation entails only the fi rst half of the process: the owner of the property is stripped of it but there is no corresponding acquisition of ownership by the authorities. [...] In the spirit of the tradition so deftly being invoked, the role of the State was simply to safeguard the public interest by acting as the ‘custodian for the benefi t of all South Africans’. [...] 6@Liberty, a product of the IRR 22 July 2014 – 11/2014 On the third issue, the State’s argument was that compensation should be nil in the instant case because the purposes of the Act were benign and the totality of the amount that might be due to all erstwhile holders of ‘old-order’ rights would be crippling. [...] Froneman believed the majority was willing to countenance a deprivation in every case in which the statute placed the property in the hands, not of the State, but of the public at large. [...] But at the heart of the Bill is a provision that says it is not ‘an act of expropriation’ if the State’s con- duct results in a deprivation which is not accompanied by the State’s acquisition of the ownership of the property in question.
- Pages
- 9
- Published in
- Johannesburg, South Africa
