Resource information
This case study deals with the South African government policies for restitution and redistribution of land to people in rural areas who were deprived of it due to racially discriminatory laws and practice. Its main focus is on how the interactions between civil society and the state in the several phases of land reform through the 1990s reflect some key issues of governance, eg. as an undemocratic, racist government tries to put in place some guarantees of continued privilege for its constituency; as the same government buckles under pressure not to make any major policy decisions during the last stages of the transitional period; and as a democratically elected government committed to land reform tries to make its promises become reality but faces key challenges to its authority. The case study shows quite clearly that while resolution of the land issue is a central part of state construction under the new democratic situation, it is also a source of potential conflict in restructuring social authority. In short, the land question highlights, but does not necessarily resolve, the tension between social control and social incorporation that challenge any effort at state construction and nation-building.The study goes on to examine land reform issues throughout the recent history of democratisation in South Africa, highlighting key governmental attitudes and policies for undermining black people’s rights to land and create a pool of migrant, cheap labour during the various periods of the apartheid era. At the same time, it focus on the role of the different types of Civil Society Organisations in dealing with the issue, either challenging the unjust land distribution and advocating for the rights of the poor, or actually helping to increase these inequalities while pursuing, for example, the interests of farmers and other land owners’ groups. The pressure for solving the land issue would then become harder for the new democratic government when the international community comes on board to demand liberalisation policies in the land redistribution process. Many Civil Society Organisations argued that liberalisation would make it harder for poor people to afford land.Meanwhile, governmental and international empathy for traditional forms of public representation such as tribal leaderships had weakened considerably due to a new climate for promoting greater democracy and gender equality. While was necessary for the government to ensure that new mechanisms of public representation were put in place, the government itself has had to reassess internal management and stakeholder relationship issues in order to promote accountability and assume responsibility for creating greater social justice.The authors conclude that, while much remains to be done, the democratic government of South Africa since 1994 must be given credit for its enormous efforts to date to find workable and just solutions. Civil society also has to be applauded for its consistent engagement with government and communities in trying to offer technical advice and provide reality and conscience checks on all sides.
