South Africa’s Parliament has passed the Upgrading of Land Tenure Rights Amendment Bill which aims to change the 1991 law of the same name so as to allow for the conversion of land tenure rights into ownership, among other things.

In a statement late on Tuesday, Parliament said its lower house, the National Assembly (NA), passed the bill during its plenary session and it would now be sent to the upper house, National Council of Provinces, for concurrence.

The ruling African National Congress has a comfortable majority in both chambers.

The bill was necessitated by two orders of the Constitutional Court which found that the Upgrading of Land Tenure Rights Act of 1991 was unconstitutional because it discriminated against the rights of women to independently own property, while a section of it was inapplicable in some former homelands that existed during apartheid rule.

“Section 25(6) and (9) of the Constitution … places an obligation on Parliament to pass legislation that ensures that a person or community whose tenure is legally insecure as a result of past, racially discriminatory laws or practices, is entitled to either tenure that is legally secure or comparable redress,” Parliament said.

It said public engagements on the bill facilitated by its portfolio committee on agriculture, land reform and rural development had demonstrated that complex tenure insecurity in communal areas, could not be addressed through sections of the 1991 law.

A comprehensive legislation envisaged in the Communal Land Tenure Bill was required, said Parliament.

“Having concluded its deliberations on the Bill the committee made numerous amendments to the initial Bill and recommended that the NA adopt it with those amendments. During its plenary today, the NA passed the Bill with amendments,” it said.

Some critics say the Upgrading of Land Tenure Rights Amendment Bill, as well as plans to amend South Africa’s Constitution to allow for land to be confiscated without compensation, are a threat to the sanctity of property rights.

The government however insists that these legal changes are necessary to reverse racist historical policies that gave more land to whites.