CAPE TOWN, Western Cape — National Assembly Speaker Thoko Didiza has firmly pushed back against the Democratic Alliance’s (DA) ongoing Expropriation Act legal challenge, asserting that the opposition party’s case lacks any constitutional foundation. The high-stakes battle over the controversial legislation is currently unfolding at the Western Cape High Court, where the DA stands as one of four organizations seeking to have key sections of the law declared unconstitutional.
At the heart of the opposition’s argument are procedural concerns regarding Section 19 of the Constitution and the issue of legislative mandates within the National Council of Provinces (NCOP). The DA contends that certain NCOP members voted in favor of the bill without receiving the proper mandates from their respective provincial legislatures, a procedural failure they argue invalidates the entire legislative process.
However, the legal team representing Speaker Didiza, led by Senior Counsel Kate Hofmeyr, strongly dismissed these claims. Describing the opposition as “prolific litigators,” Hofmeyr argued that it was highly irregular for the party not to raise objections while the voting was actively taking place in the NCOP.
Presenting the Speaker’s stance, Hofmeyr emphasized that there is no “constitutional hook” to invalidate the law. She noted that the legislation does not breach Section 76, Section 44, or Section 65 of the Constitution. Furthermore, she argued that relying on Section 65(1)(a) and (b) is not a properly pleaded basis for invalidation, as those clauses merely stipulate voting mechanics and how many votes will carry the day in the NCOP, rather than creating substantive obligations.
Addressing the DA’s interpretation of the Mandating Act—which the party claims requires mandates to be issued during plenary sessions by provincial legislators—Hofmeyr clarified a crucial legal principle. She stated that both the Mandating Act and the Expropriation Act hold equivalent status as acts of parliament. Therefore, a parliamentary act cannot be deemed unconstitutional simply because it is alleged to be inconsistent with another equivalent act of parliament.
Based on these arguments, the Speaker’s legal counsel is formally urging the Western Cape High Court to strike the DA’s case off the roll entirely.
As proceedings continue, the court is scheduled to hear further arguments tomorrow from the legal representatives of the Minister of Land Reform and Rural Development.