Rural women in parts of the Eastern Cape are being charged anything from R100 to more than R100,000 for land, yet many still lack secure rights to the properties they occupy or cultivate.
The Commission for Gender Equality (CGE) has warned Parliament that patriarchal practices, discriminatory land allocation and inheritance systems favouring men continue to shut women out of land ownership and the economic opportunities that come with it.
Briefing Parliament’s Portfolio Committee on Land Reform and Rural Development last week, the commission reported that fewer than 35% of the women surveyed owned land, compared with more than 50% of men.
The disparity leaves women at an economic disadvantage because they cannot readily use land or property as collateral to access formal finance, the CGE said.
Yet women are not absent from agricultural activity or entrepreneurship. The commission told MPs that women account for a greater share of farmers than men and own more small and micro businesses.
The problem, it argued, is that their economic participation has not translated into equal access to land and secure tenure.
The CGE identified insecure tenure in communal areas, patriarchal traditions and inheritance practices that pass land down the male line among the barriers facing women.
It also raised concerns about discriminatory land allocation practices and the limited participation of women in traditional councils responsible for decisions affecting access to communal land.
Registration and occupancy costs, complicated procedures and lengthy delays create further obstacles, particularly for women who cannot afford the costs associated with securing their rights.
The Eastern Cape findings also exposed uncertainty over what people should pay to obtain land.
The CGE said applicants in the communities it studied faced additional allocation costs, but there was no clear understanding of what land should cost.
The figures echo concerns raised in a CGE report launched in August 2024, which examined communal land access in the Eastern Cape, North West and Limpopo.
That investigation found that some Eastern Cape applicants had paid for land using livestock, including sheep and chickens, as well as alcohol.
In Limpopo, reported allocation fees ranged from R500 to R15,000, while allegations of corruption also emerged.
The earlier report found that South Africa lacked national guidelines or a policy governing communal land allocation.
The CGE linked this regulatory gap to the failure to establish a lasting replacement framework after the Constitutional Court struck down the Communal Land Rights Act in 2010.
The commission recommended that the Department of Land Reform and Rural Development lead efforts to reform the law governing communal land.
Without clear rules, transparent allocation processes and effective oversight, women risk remaining dependent on local power structures that can restrict their access to land.
Committee chairperson Albert Mncwango said distributing land was not enough if women could not secure their rights or use it to improve their economic circumstances.
The committee called for land administration that is transparent, fair and accountable, with women’s access to land translating into meaningful economic opportunities.
It proposed inviting the Department of Land Reform and Rural Development and relevant entities, including the Ingonyama Trust Board (ITB), to respond to the commission’s findings.
The committee also wants to examine whether legislative changes are needed, assess whether government plans and budgets adequately address women’s land needs, and conduct oversight visits to investigate how land is allocated.
The National Assembly referred the CGE reports to the committee for consideration and a report back. The committee did not specify when it would report back.
The findings also raise questions about accountability in the administration of communal land, including land administered through the Ingonyama Trust in KwaZulu-Natal.
In March, Land Reform Minister Mzwanele Nyhontso announced that the Ingonyama Trust Board would be dissolved.
The board disputed the move, describing it as unlawful and saying it would challenge the decision in court.
The dispute adds another layer to questions about who exercises authority over communal land and how those powers are held accountable.
Section 25(6) of the Constitution provides that people whose tenure is insecure because of past racially discriminatory laws or practices are entitled to secure tenure or comparable redress, as provided for by an Act of Parliament.
The CGE’s findings raise questions about how effectively that constitutional protection is being realised for rural women who continue to face barriers to obtaining secure land rights.
