CORRUPTION: A DEATH KNELL ON SOUTH AFRICA’S CONSTITUTIONAL DEMOCRACY

“Any man who afflicts the human race with ideas must be prepared to see them misunderstood” H.L Mencken

Introduction:

Corruption Watch is an independent civil society organization in the social justice sector, launched in 2012. Its launch was a reaction to an endemic level of corruption in South Africa. Its work and research are undoubtedly credible in South Africa’s constitutional democracy. On the 7 April 2024, released its research findings on the scourge of corruption in South Africa. Its research findings are nerve wrecking when its research revealed the ratings of corruption both at national and provincial level. It suggested the corruption levels in the following category: maladministration 34%; fraud 21%; employment irregularities 16%; bribery/extortion 15% and procurement irregularities 13%. This high level of corruption has the potential to push South Africa democracy into abyss and catastrophic proportions. It is a reflection of institutionalized corruption within the state, and which will tremendous efforts to reverse the tide. The Transparency International’s 2023 corruption perception index South Africa slumped to its lowest score of increased corruption from 41 to the global average of 43 and described as “flawed democracy”.

Corruption Practices in Land Governance:

Restitution of Land Rights Programme:

It is plausible that the Corruption Watch noted that in the area of land governance in particular the restitution corruption cannot occur without the involvement of unscrupulous government officials, businesspeople and the political elite.

The restitution process has become honeypot for corruption within the Commission on Restitution of Land Rights in particular Mpumalanga Province. The 2018, Special Investigating Unit Report on 148 land reform projects spanning 2011 to 2017 found major systemic weaknesses and alarming absence of controls and mechanism to prevent fraud and maladministration in the department of agriculture, rural development and land reform. 

The scourge of corruption within the department of agriculture, rural development and land reform and the Commission on Restitution of Land Rights caused the restitution programme to become a crisis in its own right. Hundreds of thousands of people who lodged land claims before the cut – off date of 1998 are still waiting for their land. Many claimants have died in the intervening 30 years of constitutional democracy. The Commission’s officials are accustomed to act outside the law and with impunity. [Land and Accountability Research Center, University of Cape Town]  

CPA’s and Bogus Trusts Vehicles for Corruption:   

My practical interaction with community claimants throughout the country had provided me with deep – seated insight into the spectrum of corruption within the department of land affairs and the commission on restitution of land rights. The most notably method use by officials to siphon funds and or steal restitution funds from both the department of land affairs and commission on restitution of land rights was through – the communal property associations [CPAs] and bogus communal trusts. This corrupt practice is most dominant is the commission of restitution in the Mpumalanga Province. The corrupt practices are perpetuated through these vehicles with impunity and without any sense of accountability and or consequent management. The Corruption Watch Organization laments the impunity on corruption in South Africa in the following manner:

“It is frustrating that, in a country like South Africa, where the corrupt have been exposed for all to see in such public processes as the Zondo Commission and robust media investigations, so few of the implicated parties have been brought to justice.”

The Land and Accountability Research Centre based at the University of Cape Town also found that ‘the production failures on land reform farms have led the department to fall back on old elite; traditional leaders to control CPA’s and white farmers to manage the land. This is devastating to black families who were forcibly removed from land that they had farmed productively and dream of returning to it”.

Diversion of the Restitution Process through CPA’s: 

The use of Communal Property Associations [CPA’s] and Bogus Trusts by unscrupulous Commission’s officials obstruct the passage of South Africa’s land reform programme. Such corrupt practice is intended to sabotage and divert the land reform programme to benefit the legitimate restitution beneficiaries. The intended detrimental effect of such corrupt practice is that many restitution beneficiaries passed away without their dignity being affirmed and restorative social justice being realized. This corrupt practice is executed in the following manner (i) the commission’s official would cajole and hoodwink the community claimants to register a Communal Property Association [CPA] to manage the farms which had been purchased by government on their behalf (ii) the unscrupulous commission’s official that had been working on the community land claim about to settled would resign from the commission and assume a treasury  position in the CPA (iii) those the unscrupulous official is not a beneficiary of restitution would be the one receiving [restitution settlement funds] from the commission (iv) the restitution beneficiaries would be locked out of the process once the community land claim had been settled (v) the community land claim would be managed by the Communal Property Association [CPA] without their participation.

Corrupt Collusion with White Farmers:

After government had purchased farms from the sellers [white farmers] for restitution beneficiaries unscrupulous commission’s officials compel white farmers to keep staying and farming on the farms but pay monthly rental to Communal Property Associations [CPA” s]. The Land and Accountability Research also noted this pattern in the North – West in the following manner : “Another long – standing pattern in the North – West is for the restitution land to be leased to white farmers rather than restored to its original owners. The CPA chair and committee manage the rental income and there are numerous examples of the rents enriching the committees rather than the claimants who remain locked outside their land.”  

Daantjie land claim:

Government settled the Daantjie land claim by purchasing the farms in which the community was historically dispossessed and removed from the land in terms of Land Act of 1913 namely: the Excelsior farm 211 JU; Caraceto farm 223 JU and Weltervrede farm 210 JU for an amount of R98 360 000 [Ninety – Eight Million Three Hundred and Sixty Thousand Rand] and restored land in title measuring a total of 2 372.3094 hectares in extent.

It is an indictment and deep – seated institutionalized corruption that despite government having paid these three farms for restitution beneficiaries at the above -mentioned amount that the farms had never been restored back to the intended restitution beneficiaries. Instead, the white farmers are still staying and farming in these [three farms] and paying monthly rental to the Mpakeni Mlangeni Communal Property Associations [CPA] which is constituted by unscrupulous Commission’s officials. The restitution beneficiaries are living in poverty and destitution and had been locked out of the restitution process.

Dalmanutha Land Claim:

Government through the department of land reform settled by purchasing the Dalmanutha which the individual families were historically dispossessed and forcibly removed from the land in terms of the Land Act of 1913 for an amount of R13 256 089.51 for the restitution beneficiaries. The unscrupulous Commission’s officials registered a bogus trust with fictitious beneficiaries and locked out the legitimate restitution beneficiaries. The original farmer of the farm Mr. Johannes Visagie is still staying on the farm and paying monthly rental to unscrupulous Commission’s officials. The family of other portions of the farm was/is denied the rights to bury any family members on the farm despite being the beneficiary of restitution process.

Zilverkop Farm:

Government through the department of land reform settled by purchasing Zilverkop farm which individual families were historically dispossessed and forcibly removed from the land in terms of the Land Act of 1913 for an amount of R36 000 000 [Thirty-Six Million Rand]. The unscrupulous Commission’s officials registered Skhunyane Communal Property Association [CPA] and made the previous white farm owners directors of the CPA. The large preponderance of the restitution beneficiaries are  locked – out from the benefits of restitution. Zilverkop is one of the most productive dairy farms in Mpumalanga Province

Conclusion:

The above – mentioned examples are just the epitome of the scourge and rampant corruption taking place within the department of land affairs and Commission on Restitution of Land Rights. These examples confirm the report by the Special Investigating Unit Report noted a ‘major systemic” weakness and an alarming absence of controls and mechanisms to prevent fraud and maladministration in the department of rural development and land affairs”.

In her address to the Parliamentary Portfolio on land affairs Minister Thoko Didiza confirmed the scourge of corruption in the following manner “some of the challenges facing the department were land administration and land governance systems, issues of accountability, slow disciplinary processes and consequent management”.

It is crystal evident that corruption is a cancer not in South Africa’s body politic but on governance and ethical leadership.

Thank you