Lawson Naidoo, the Executive Secretary of the Council for the Advancement of the South African Constitution (CASAC), has recently expressed concern over the functioning of the Ad Hoc Committee tasked with amending Section 25 of the Constitution. According to Naidoo, the Committee is not functioning as it should due to political interests taking precedence over the task at hand.
The Ad Hoc Committee was established by Parliament in December 2019, with the aim of amending Section 25 of the Constitution to allow for expropriation of land without compensation. This move was seen as a critical step towards addressing the historical injustices of land dispossession in South Africa. However, more than a year later, the Committee has made little progress, and Naidoo believes that political interests are to blame.
In an interview with a local news outlet, Naidoo stated that the Committee has been plagued by political posturing and grandstanding, with little focus on the actual work of amending the Constitution. He also highlighted the lack of cooperation and consensus-building among Committee members from different political parties, which has resulted in delays and stalling of the process.
Naidoo’s concerns are not unfounded. The Committee has faced numerous challenges since its inception, including disruptions and walkouts by opposition parties, as well as disagreements over the scope and purpose of the amendment. This has led to a lack of progress and a failure to meet the original deadline of March 2020.
Naidoo further pointed out that the Ad Hoc Committee is a reflection of the broader political landscape in South Africa, where party politics often take precedence over the interests of the country and its people. He emphasized the need for political parties to put aside their differences and work together towards a common goal, which in this case, is the amendment of Section 25 to address the issue of land reform.
As the Executive Secretary of CASAC, Naidoo has been a vocal advocate for the protection of the Constitution and the rule of law in South Africa. He has consistently called for a non-partisan approach to the amendment of Section 25, stressing the importance of upholding the principles of fairness, justice, and inclusivity in the process.
Naidoo’s concerns are shared by many South Africans who are eagerly waiting for the amendment of Section 25 to be finalized. Land reform has been a contentious issue in the country for decades, and the slow progress of the Ad Hoc Committee is a cause for frustration and disappointment.
However, despite the challenges faced by the Committee, Naidoo remains optimistic that a solution can be found. He believes that with the right political will and commitment, the Committee can overcome its differences and fulfill its mandate of amending Section 25 in a timely and efficient manner.
In conclusion, Lawson Naidoo’s comments on the functioning of the Ad Hoc Committee are a wake-up call for all political parties involved. It is time to put aside political interests and focus on the task at hand – amending Section 25 to ensure a more equitable distribution of land in South Africa. The country and its people are counting on the Committee to deliver on its mandate, and it is crucial that they do so in a manner that upholds the values and principles of our Constitution. Let us hope that the Committee heeds Naidoo’s words and works towards a positive and meaningful outcome for all South Africans.
