A golden midway for a divided society? : the South African land reform project and its relationship with the rule of law and transformation

[摘要] ENGLISH ABSTRACT:South Africa's history led to an unequal distribution in land ownership, which is notconducive to democratic consolidation. Land refortn is the means to address thisproblem. However, land reform, part of the larger process of transformation, is apotentially dangerous process: it can have negative implications on the rule of law.The objective of this study is to provide an analysis of the dynamic relationshipbetween land reform, the rule of law and transformation in South Africa, within thedebate on democratic consolidation.One can distinguish two paradigms regarding democracy: the liberal paradigm and theliberationist paradigm. These two paradigms have divergent views on the way landreform and transformation should be implemented, and what the goal of these twoprocesses is. The liberal paradigm would seem to be more favourable for democraticconsolidation, while the liberationist paradigm is a breeding ground for populisttransformation.Furthermore, the negotiated constitutional settlement has left land reform with anambiguity. On the one hand the constitution forces the govemment to address landreform, but on the other hand it firmly entrenches the private property rights byenforcing the 'willing buyer, willing seller' principle, which makes the process morecostly and time consuming.The main hypothesis of this study is: Demographic indicators (race, party affiliationand provincial setting) influence support or rejection of the land reform policies of theSouth African govemment. Tbe dependent variable is 'support or rejection of thegovernment's land reform policies'. Support for the govemment's land reformpolicies is indicative of the liberal paradigm and rejection of the govemment'spolicies is indicative of the liberationist paradigm.It is found that the majority of South Africans reject the govemment's land reformpolicies. However, strong divisions are evident. Respondents differ along racial,party affiliation and provincial lines. Thus, the liberationist paradigm dominates, butthe liberal paradigm has a strong presence, creating an ideologically divided society.This means that the legitimacy of South Africa's land reform project, as well as thelegitimacy of the constitution, is under stress. This does not bode well for democraticconsolidation, as the rule of law is under severe threat. Thus, one can conclude thatland reform is not going to make a positive contribution to the consolidation of SouthAfrica's democracy, if a substantial financial injection is not found to increase theefficiency of the process.

[发布机构] Stellenbosch University