Public hearings regarding the amendment of section twenty-five of the constitution taking place around the country got a thunderous nod from the Kuruman public, adding unanimous approval throughout the province.

Led by the Constitutional Review Committee on June 29, 2018 at Thabo Moorosi multi-purpose centre in Mothibistad, the need for the amendment of section 25 dealing with land acquisition without compensation was swamped with the tyrannical past instead of advocating for improved agrarian reforms to justify expropriation desires.

The indigenous blacks and afro-whites sounded in one accord and only differed in approach where the latter did not look into mere entitlement and resettlement, but in the utilisation of land as the nerve centre of food security and growing the economy. While the gruesome political history took the centre stage, the black majority feels they were forcibly squeezed into a corner to non-arable pieces of land, and therefore the preliminary hearings must take cognisance of the fact that land owned by the minority in the greater region of Kuruman, Kathu and the Hotazel areas is their ancestral land.

One of the commercial farmers’ representatives, Mr Jansen, said that the exercise must not disrupt the economy and that government must first redistribute about 2.8 million hectares it owns and 4.2 million hectares is owned by blacks. He said that the constitution does not affect land redistribution much to the disapproval from the indigenous blacks.

Mr Nelson Hantise, a community leader, said that the exercise must be done with great caution to avoid a nasty situation leading to food insecurity and an abrupt collapse in industrial production as witnessed in the neighbouring Zimbabwe.

Most of the contributors pointed out that farms in this area are either derelict or under-utilised by private owners. The only farms in use are those involved in the mining activities, wine producing around the Kakamas area with patches used for cattle rearing in the province.

The appetite for the expropriation of land without compensation was voluminous and invoked historical emotions throughout the deliberations. Opposition parties also weighed in the review of the constitution, however they were divergent in their perspective and rationale with the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) more inclined to ownership while the Democratic Alliance is advocating for a cautious approach in the endorsement of the entire exercise in fear of jeopardising the economy and triggering disinvestment.