1

Israel and Apartheid South Africa: A Comparative Study

Over the past decade, there has been growing sentiment and debate around the assertion
that Israels state policies and practices towards the Palestinians are characteristic of apartheid
South Africa. The comparative study herein will set out to determine, via a comparison of the
two systems in view of international law, whether the charge of apartheid carries substantive
weight. In no way is the essay an exhaustive study of the numerous policies and actions that the
two states have respectively implemented in regard to their subjugated populations. The study
will be limited in scope to state actors and actions. All regions under the control and rule of
Israel will be subject to examination, including the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) of the
West Bank and the Gaza Strip. Additionally, the focus will be limited to a select set of key
policies having to deal with issues pertaining to identity and citizenship, land, social
participation, and judicial practice.
The framework and litmus of the analysis will be the international law definition of
apartheid as defined by Article II of the 1973 International Convention on the Suppression and
Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid (Apartheid Convention), UN General Assembly
Resolution 3068. The Apartheid Convention was adopted to serve as an instrument of
international law in order to criminalize the practice of apartheid and more effectively censure
entities that engaged in such. The practice of apartheid in South Africa was regularly condemned
by the United Nations from 1952 until the South African apartheid system came to an end in
1990. According to John Dugard, South African professor of international law and Special
Rapporteur to the UN Commission on Human Rights, the conventions purpose is not solely to
condemn South African apartheid per se, but rather the evidence suggests that the Apartheid
2

Convention is intended to apply to situations other than South Africa [as] confirmed by its
endorsement in a wider context in instruments adopted before and after the fall of apartheid.
According to Article II of UN General Assembly Resolution 3068, the crime of apartheid
includes similar policies and practices of racial segregation and discrimination as practised in
southern Africa, [including] the following inhuman acts committed for the purpose of
establishing and maintaining domination by one racial group of persons over any other racial
group of persons and systematically oppressing them:
(a) Denial to a member or members of a racial group or groups of the right to life and
liberty of person:
(i) By murder of members of a racial group or groups;
(ii) By the infliction upon the members of a racial group or groups of serious
bodily or mental harm, by the infringement of their freedom or dignity, or by
subjecting them to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or
punishment;
(iii) By arbitrary arrest and illegal imprisonment of the members of a racial group
or groups;
(b) Deliberate imposition on a racial group or groups of living conditions calculated to
cause its or their physical destruction in whole or in part;
(c) Any legislative measures and other measures calculated to prevent a racial group or
groups from participation in the political, social, economic and cultural life of the country
and the deliberate creation of conditions preventing the full development of such a group
or groups, in particular by denying to members of a racial group or groups basic human
rights and freedoms, including the right to work, the right to form recognized trade
3

unions, the right to education, the right to leave and to return to their country, the right to
a nationality, the right to freedom of movement and residence, the right to freedom of
opinion and expression, and the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association;
(d) Any measures including legislative measures, designed to divide the population along
racial lines by the creation of separate reserves and ghettos for the members of a racial
group or groups, the prohibition of mixed marriages among members of various racial
groups, the expropriation of landed property belonging to a racial group or groups or to
members thereof;
(e) Exploitation of the labour of the members of a racial group or groups, in particular by
submitting them to forced labour;
(f) Persecution of organizations and persons, by depriving them of fundamental rights
and freedoms, because they oppose apartheid.
For the purpose of this study, focus will be given to sections (c) and (d) explicitly
specifying the legislative measures that are characteristic of the crime of apartheid. In regard to
Israeli policies, the following key statutes, inter alia, will be analyzed herein: the Law of Return
(1950), the Absentee Property Law (1950), the Nationality Law (1952), the Jewish Agency Law
(1952), and the National Planning and Building Law (1965). As regards apartheid South African
policies, the following will also be discussed: the Natives Land Act (1913), the Urban Areas Act
(1923), the Bantu Authorities Act (1951), the Promotion of Bantu Self-Government Act (1959),
and Bantu Homelands Citizens Act (1970). The full text of select laws can be found in the
Appendix attached hereto. Because the nature of this study is focused upon the question of
identifying a collective system of apartheid, an adequate set of policies, as opposed to one or
two, must be examined in order to gain proper purview of a holistic system. The delineated,
4

applicable conditions of Article II, sections (c) and (d), as relates to denying members of a racial
group or groups basic human rights and freedoms, will be discussed in view of the
aforementioned policies as well as others not listed.

Denied right to freedom of movements
According to Virginia Tilley, in international law, the right to freedom of movement has
internal aspects, which include the right to move freely and to choose ones place of residence
within the borders of the country, and external aspects, which include the right to leave ones
country and to return to it (147). In South Africa, the Native Laws Amendment Act of 1955
restricted access rights of Africans to demarcated white areas. A series of Pass Laws were
created which made it illegal for Africans to travel outside of their assigned homelands without a
pass book of identification; those caught without proper identification were subject to fines,
arrests, and deportation. Blacks were instructed to obtain work permits within 72 hours upon
arrival into a white urban area.
Similarly, according to the human rights organization BTselem, Israel's severe
restrictions on Palestinians' freedom of movement in the West Bank are enforced by a system of
fixed checkpoints, surprise flying checkpoints, physical obstructions, roads on which
Palestinians are forbidden to travel, and gates along the Separation Barrier. Palestinians must
carry and present identification in order to pass through any of the checkpoints. Consequently,
travel time between nearby cities and villages is multiplied; even ambulances with patients are
not immune from having to wait in long queues. Permits required for people to travel in order to
seek medical attention in other localities are categorized as humanitarian permits. Indeed, there
have been numerous instances where people have died en route to a hospital. The permit regime
5

that Israel imposes on Palestinians replicates many of the limitations imposed by South Africas
Pass Laws. Since the 1990s, individual Palestinian entry into Israel (within the Green Line), to
Jewish Settlement blocs in the OPT, and to East Jerusalem from other parts of the OPT has been
conditional on acquiring a personal entry permit (Tilley 151).
It is also important to note the restriction of movement on Palestinians was not always
limited to the OPT. Following the 1948 war, the borders of Israel enclosed roughly 150,000
Palestinians within the new state (750,000 other Palestinians that resided within the borders
before statehood became refugees and were denied their right to return and/or obtain Israeli
citizenship). The leftover Palestinian minority that found itself within Israel were granted
citizenship, but lived under completely different rules than their Jewish counterparts. From 1948
to 1966, the Arab minority lived in areas that were considered security zones by the state and
were thus governed under martial law. All the Palestinian villages and settlements in Galilee,
the triangle, and the Negev were divided into small pockets called closed areas usually
consisting of one or more Palestinian villages, which no Palestinian could leave or enter for any
reason without first obtaining a written permit from the military governor of the area (Badran
33). Although these overt practices were eliminated in 66 within Israel, they were more or less
applied to the OPT population in 67. The governing decrees are officially referred to as Israeli
Military Orders.

Denied right to freedom of residence & Creation of separate reserves and ghettos for members
of a racial group or groups
Apartheid South Africa was perhaps most notorious for its egregious implementation of
segregated regions or bantustans (homelands) based on race. The Natives Land Act (1913), the
6

Urban Areas Act (1923), and the Group Areas Act (1950) all served as regulatory techniques of
control to further segregate the various ethnic peoples of South Africa. As Tilley asserts, these
acts divided South Africa into separate areas, each reserved exclusively for the use of a
particular racial group, while ensuring that the white group maintained control over the most
economically productive areas of the country (197). As the international community began to
pay more and more attention to the overtly discriminatory actions of the apartheid regime, the
South African government in the 1950s and 60s attempted to assuage criticism through the
creation of self-governing homelands via the Promotion of Bantu Self-Government Act (1959)
and the Bantu Homelands Citizens Act (1970). The logic in creating these autonomous
homelands was to appeal to the United Nations principle of every peoples right to self-
determination. However, in actuality, the policy was simply part of an overarching strategy to
obviate any demographic threat to the white minority rule over the most desirable land (not
totally dissimilar to the strategy adopted by Israel in regard to the previously alluded to 750,000
Palestinians that became stateless refugees overnight, banned from returning home).
In Israel/Palestine, the denial of right to freedom of residence is ubiquitous. The most
glaring example is the restricted settler colonies that pervade the West Bank. Palestinians are
restricted to living in a number of cantons that are surrounded by settlements, settler-only roads,
and Israeli controlled military zones and state lands. As previously mentioned, in order to move
about the West Bank, to visit family, seek medical attention, or work in East Jerusalem,
Palestinians must obtain permits, carry identification, and wade through various dehumanizing
checkpoints. All the while, Jewish settlers are free to roam the West Bank via their exclusive
network of roads and highways, exit and enter Israel (west of the 1949 Green Line) without any
checkpoints, as well as live and work in outposts and colonial settlements that dot the land;
7

notwithstanding the fact that these settlements have been condemned by the international
community as contravening international law (See: UN Security Council resolution 252, 1968;
HRC resolution 2/4, January 9 2007; Fourth Geneva Convention).

Figure 1: Maps of the Black homelands in apartheid South Africa (left) and areas of autonomous Palestinian control in the
West Bank under the Oslo Accords (right) (Maps: Philip Munger)

In East Jerusalem, the proclaimed capital of Palestine, the Israeli Ministry of Interior
created a legal measure to further strip the right to reside in Jerusalem from permanent
Palestinian residents. The measure is based on a center of life test which allows the occupying
power to revoke the permanent residency of a Palestinian if his or her center of life is no longer
8

in East Jerusalem. An absence of seven years or the procurement of residency or citizenship in
another country is taken as proof that the residents center of life has changed (Tilley 157).
Human rights groups have referred to this injustice as quiet deportation; since 1967, thousands of
Jerusalem residents have lost their right to reside in the city due to this policy. Moreover,
permanent residency in the West Bank or East Jerusalem is not Israeli citizenship; it is a status
that was conferred upon Arabs in the OPT and East Jerusalem when Israel illegally annexed the
region in 1967.
Again, these types of residential discriminatory actions/policies are not limited to the
OPT. The World Zionist Organisation Jewish Agency (Status) Law (1952) further promulgates
discrimination against Palestinians within Israel by stipulating in Article 4: The State of Israel
recognises the World Zionist Organisation as the authorised agency which will continue to
operate in the State of Israel for the development and settlement of the country and the
coordination of the activities in Israel of Jewish institutions and organisations active in those
fields. As related by Adalah, The Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel:
An Arab family, represented by the Association for civil Rights in Israel (ACRI),
sought to purchase a house in Katseer [a settlement near several Arab villages
jointly built by the Jewish Agency and the State]. The family complied with all
the procedural requirements for purchase, however, The Association of Katseer,
which administers the process, refused to accept their application. The
Association explained that according the internal regulations of the Jewish
Agency, it is not allowed to sell houses in Katseer to non-Jews. The Arab family,
Kadaan, filed a petition against the State and the Jewish Agency to the Supreme
Court in 1995 challenging the refusal of their application to purchase a house in
9

Katseer In its response, the government rejected the petitioners argument
explaining that the act of the State is legal, as it relied on The WZO Law (53).

Denied right to leave and to return to ones country
In apartheid South Africa, several policies imposed limits on the ability of blacks to
return to their native homes. Some of these policies have already been discussed above, such as
the Bantu Homeland Citizen Act that effectively tied blacks to ethnic cantons and made any legal
claim to their right of return to white areas impossible. The sequestered white areas were
considered separate countries; therefore native black citizens that were removed from a white
area were made foreigners. The governments Minster of Bantu Administration and
Development oversaw and regulated all access to the white countries.
In Israel, the Law of Return (1950) and Nationality Law (1952) allowed Jews residing
anywhere in the world to settle in the state of Israel. In contrast, the 750,000 Palestinian refugees
that fled the violence of the 1948 war, as well as their offspring, were banned from returning to
their property. Similarly, following the 1967 war, an additional 325,000 Palestinian refugees
were made personae non gratae. Today, roughly 5 million people, including refugees and their
descendants, have registered with the UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) in order to
document their plight. The continual denial of rights to Palestinians by the occupying state has
remained a mainstay of Israeli policy, from its inception to today. As discussed in the previous
section, the ongoing denial of residency rights remains a contentious issue, especially in Arab
communities such as East Jerusalem. Discriminatory laws in place governing/restricting
residency have created situations that divide families as well as instill anxiety in people who fear
that travel outside of their neighborhood will create additional problems and impediments upon
10

return; these people effectively become prisoners in their own homes. For example, take the case
of Amir Salima as reported by the Israeli newspaper Haaretz in 2012:
Amir Salima, 21, from the Old City of Jerusalem, has no legal status - not in
Israel, not in the Palestinian Authority and not anywhere else. He has no identity
card, no passport, he cannot register for university studies, apply for a job, sign up
for an HMO or open a bank account. He cannot visit the West Bank or anywhere
else outside of Jerusalem. In fact, he can barely leave his house, for fear of being
caught by the police. Salima fell victim to a complex legal situation in which
Palestinians from East Jerusalem are eligible for "residency," under the Entry to
Israel Law, similar to tourists who enter Israel for a limited stay. Residency,
however, does not pass automatically from parents to children, and the law does
not address a situation in which the child of residents is born outside of Israel.
As Amneh Badran, author of Zionist Israel and Apartheid South Africa, points out, In
the case of South Africa, Africans were ethnically cleansed inside the country, with three and a
half million being pushed into the native homelands. In the case of Palestine, they were pushed
outside mandatory Palestine (29). The author of Palesine/Israel: Peace or Apartheid further
draws the comparison, as in South Africa, where the blacks, who made up 67 percent of the
population, could not set foot in 92.3 percent of the land, so did the new state of Israel exclude
three-quarters of the original inhabitants from their land, forbidding them return (Bishara 96).




11

Denied right to a nationality
Through the application of the Promotion of Bantu Self-Government Act (1959) and the
Bantu Homelands Citizens Act (1970), the South African whites were able to further segment the
society on racial lines. The former act created the homelands, while the latter was enacted in
order to complete the segregation process, whereby blacks of the assigned homelands were
issued new citizenship of their respective homeland and denied their South African citizenship.
Black Africans holding these new citizenships became aliens in South Africa and could only
occupy their own homes in the urban areas by special permission of the Minister (Tilley 165).
In Israel and the OPT, the denial of the right to citizenship manifests itself in several
fashions. Firstly, in Israel, the combination of the Law of Return (1950) and Nationality Law
(1952) granted full citizenship for Jews anywhere, regardless of any tangible connection to the
land, while simultaneously denying citizenship and the right of return for Palestinian refugees
(many of whom were land and home owners). One can easily discern, prima facie, the clear
discriminatory nature of such policies, the audacity of which is only compounded when
considering the fact that many of the Palestinians who became refugees fled their homes out of a
very real fear: The instance of such terror cited most frequently is that of Deir Yassin a
Palestinian village about five miles west of Jerusalem, and on April 9, 1948, forces of the Irgun
and Stern Group entered the village and massacred 254 defenseless civilians, including about
100 women and children (Tessler 291). Additionally, since Israel annexed the OPT in 1967,
Palestinians have been granted permanent residency status, but not citizenship. Palestinians in
the OPT have been denied citizenship and self-determination by the sustained conditions of
occupation that bar the creation of a contiguous and viable Palestinian state, such as illegal
settlements, roads, barriers, and other physical and legal obstructions.
12

Denied right to education
In 1953, the Apartheid government of South Africa passed the Bantu Education Act, Act
No 47. Said act established a Black Education Department in the Department of Native Affairs.
One of its stated missions was to establish and maintain Bantu schools which shall be
known as Government Bantu schools. As to the underlying logic of the policy, the author, Dr.
Hendrik Verwoerd, explained it as thus: The Natives will be taught from childhood to realize
that equality with Europeans is not for them. There is no place for the Bantu child above the
level of certain forms of labour (Tilley 177).
In the case of Israel, there are no explicit laws barring Jews and Palestinians from
attending the same schools or limiting the study of certain educational fields by race. However,
laws have been enacted that inherently discriminate against the Arab minority in the creation of
state secular and state religious schools whose goals, to the neglect of the minoritys culture and
very identity, primarily cater to the Jewish community. For example, article 2 of The State
Education Law (1953) outlines the goals of the state education system as follows: The object of
state education is to base elementary education in the State on the values of Jewish culture and
the achievements of science, on love of the homeland and loyalty to the state and the Jewish
people, on practice in agricultural work and handicraft, on chalutzik (pioneer) training, and on
striving for a society built on freedom, equality, tolerance, mutual assistance and love of
mankind (emphasis added) (Adalah 73). Many regard this form of indoctrinated discrimination
as part and parcel of the Zionist project since its inception; indeed, it was Israels first president,
Chaim Weizmann, that stated, There is a fundamental difference in quality between Jew and
native (White 16). Also, in the OPT, due to settlements reserved for Israeli Jews only (officially
sanctioned by the state), Palestinians are barred by default from attending schools there.
13

Denied right to work
In 1963, the South African government passed the Job Reservation Act as a legal
measure explicitly limiting access to certain types of labor based on race. Second, Pass Laws
made it impracticable for blacks to apply for work in white areas other than at jobs specifically
authorized for them, such as domestic work (Tilley 167). The educational measures discussed in
the previous section paired with the acts limiting movement, residency, and employment
effectively curtailed the educational/professional development of black South Africans.
In Israel, certain legal measures exist that are often exploited to give greater preference to
Israeli Jews, while barring Palestinians from numerous benefits. The most prominent example of
this is The Absorption of Former Soldiers Law (1994), granting a plethora of preferences and
benefits to citizens that served in the Israeli Defense Forces. Theres nothing inherently
discriminatory about granting veterans benefits per se; the catch is, however, that for most Israeli
Jews, military service is mandatory, unlike the requirement for Palestinian/Arab citizens of
Israel. Consequently, about 90% of the Arabs are excluded from receiving substantial benefits
including greater housing loans, partial exemptions from fees in state-run occupations training
courses, and preferences in public employment, educational loans, and on-campus housing
(Adalah 89).
In the Occupied Palestinians Territories, the evidence of apartheid practices in relation to
employment is even more pronounced. The very nature of the restrictive policies Israel enforces
upon the Palestinian population creates an economically crippling effect; these restrictions
make the movement of people and goods more expensive, inefficient and unpredictable and
therefore have a particularly chilling effect on economic activity (Tilley 169). Additionally,
measures such as the full land, air, and sea blockade of Gaza as well as other restrictions on
14

imports and exports have exacerbated the economic inequality of the two side-by-side
populations. In 2010, the respective unemployment figures for the region were 16.5 percent for
the OPT, and 6.4 percent in Israel (Tilley 167). According to a 2011 UN report, at the time,
nearly 38 percent of Palestinians lived below the poverty line in Gaza, and nearly 18 percent in
the West Bank.

Expropriation of landed property belonging to a racial group or groups
As previously mentioned, The Natives Land Act (1913) and the Urban Areas Act (1923)
disenfranchised black South Africans by stripping them of their right to land ownership.
Furthermore, the state also conducted forced removals of blacks in areas that were reserved for
whites only, thus transferring ownership from one ethnic group to another.
In regard to Israel/Palestine, in addition to the disenfranchisement of the native Arabs, the
creation of legal measures encouraging land expropriation has been the modus operandi of the
state since its inception in 1948. On the heels of the of 1948 war, whereby roughly 750,000
Palestinians fled their homes, Israel passed the Absentee Property Law (1950) declaring any
Palestinian that left their home during the violence of 1947/1948 as being an absentee. And
further asserting, every right an absentee had in any property shall pass automatically to the
Custodian at the time of the vesting of the property; and the status of the Custodian shall be the
same as was that of the owner of the property, i.e., granting the state complete control and
ownership of their property without their consent. The state even went so far as to confiscate
property from internally displaced peoples, i.e., Palestinians that left one village to seek refuge
within another, creating the peculiar legal status of present absentees.
15

The creation of the Development Authority Law (Transfer of Property Law) (1950)
enabled further transfer of confiscated Palestinian villages and property to whomever the
Development Authority saw fit, primarily Jewish immigrants and citizens. Many similar laws
were also passed granting sweeping powers to the state enabling the expropriation, colonization,
and transfer of property, including: the State Property Law (1951), the Land Acquisition
(Validation of Acts and Compensation) Law (1953), the Basic Law: Israel Lands (1960), the
National Planning and Building Law (1965), the Land Acquisition in the Negev Law (1980), and
the Jerusalem Development Authority Law (1988), amongst others. Ben White, author of Israeli
Apartheid, relates the impact of discriminatory policy against Arabs in Israel:
All in all, since 1948, Israel has passed 30 statutes that expropriated and
transferred land from Palestinian citizens to state (Jewish) ownership. While most
large-scale dispossession was carried out in the early years of the Israeli state,
even in the 1990s, legislation like the Public Purposes Ordinance was being
used to confiscate hundreds of thousands of dunhams of private Palestinian land.
By the mid-1970s, the average Palestinian community had lost around 65-75 per
cent of its land. Palestinian loss was Jewish gain: 350 of the 370 new Jewish
settlements established between 1948 and 1953 were on Palestinian land. Almost
200,000 Jews moved into empty Arab towns and villages, while in so-called
mixed cities, Palestinians were concentrated in specified Arab quarters (46).
Another policy used to further marginalize the Palestinian minority and expropriate
Palestinian land in Israel is the enforcement of the National Planning and Building Law (1965)
which rezoned many lands as non-residential, and therefore created the phenomena of
unrecognized villages. As the 1998 Adalah Report on Legal Violations of Arab Minority
16

Rights in Israel attests, The villages, of which there are tens located throughout Israel, are
afforded no official status: they are excluded from government maps, they neither have local
councils nor belong to other local governing bodies, and they receive little to no government
services such as electricity, water, telephone lines, educational or health facilities (56). In 2012,
the unrecognized bedouin village of al-Araqib, located in the Negev desert of Israel, was
demolished for the thirty-ninth time, although the village predates the creation of the state
(Maan).
In regard to the Occupied Palestinian Territories, the state has essentially operated in the
same manner. Similarly to the 1948 mass expropriation of land from Palestinians, after the 1967
war, refugees and/or Palestinians that were away became absentees and subject to the same
policies that were used in previous years in conjunction with military orders. The Head of
Israels WZO Department for Rural Settlement outlined in his Master Plan for the Development
of Settlement in Judea and Samaria [West Bank] 1979-1983 the intentions of the land
acquisition campaign as follows: State and uncultivated land should be seized immediately for
the purpose of settlement It will be difficult for the [Arab] minority to form a regional
connection and political unity when split by Jewish colonies (Tilley 207). All of this,
notwithstanding the fact that the international community has condemned as illegal the
annexation of the OPT following the 1967 war.
The systematic transfer of land from one ethnic group to another, utilizing legal measures
to do so, has become the hallmark of Israel. Within the last four decades, nowhere is this practice
more apparent than the construction of vast settlement blocs connected by a network of Israeli-
only roads in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. Since 1967, Israel has established 135
officially recognized settlements in the West Bank (including East Jerusalem) there are over
17

280,000 settlers in the West Bank, and more than 180,000 in (illegally annexed) East Jerusalem,
making a total of almost half a million (White 62). One measure often used within the Israeli
expropriation tool-kit has been the systematic demolition of Palestinian homes to make way for
settlers, settler roads, and the creation of the separation barrier which began in 2002 (others refer
to it as a security wall or apartheid wall). According to a 2011 report by the Internal
Displacement Monitoring Center, House demolitions remain a reoccurring source of internal
displacement in East Jerusalem discriminately affecting Palestinian communities residing in East
Jerusalem. This has been aggravated in recent years as result of the construction of the
Separation Wall and continuing discriminatory policies affecting Palestinian communities in East
Jerusalem.

Figure 2: Graph of West Bank demolitions in 2009 (Internal Displacement Monitoring Center).
The separation barrier has been routed in a manner that further encroaches upon
Palestinian land and right. According to a 2011 BTselem report, Eighty-five percent of the
amended route runs through the West Bank, and not along the Green Line. In areas where the
Barrier has already been built, the extensive violations of human rights of Palestinians living
nearby are evident. Again, not unlike many of the official actions and state policies of Israel, the
separation barrier was deemed illegal by international legal ruling; in July 2004, the International
18

Court of Justice at the Hague decided 14 to 1 that the construction of the wall being built by
Israel, the occupying power, in the occupied Palestinian territory, including in and around East
Jerusalem, and its associated regime, are contrary to international law.

Final Analysis
As briefly outlined and demonstrated above, a plurality of legislative measures and
actions calculated to prevent a racial group or groups (in the instant case, Palestinian Arabs and
black South Africans, respectively) from participation in the political, social, economic and
cultural life of the country and the deliberate creation of conditions preventing the full
development of such a group or groups are readily present within official Israeli and former
South African state practice. The South African Apartheid regime and the current/past Israeli
governments have utilized similar techniques of control in terms of their creation and
enforcement of policy. The use of regulatory, redistributive, patronage, and constituent policies
have all been employed as mechanisms to discriminately benefit one group of people over
another.
The respective use of regulatory techniques by the two governments manifested itself in
legal measures that imposed discriminatory obligations and rules governing individual conduct.
In South Africa, non-whites were forced into segregated bantustans via The Natives Land Act
(1913), the Urban Areas Act (1923), and the Group Areas Act (1950) and were not allowed to
return to the prior white areas that they lived. Also, additional measures were imposed upon their
behavior, for instance, the Job Reservation Act (1963) limiting their employment possibilities.
Similarly, in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, one of the foundations of the Matrix [of
control] is the Kafkaesque skein of rules, restrictions, procedures and sanctions Israel has
19

imposed over the Occupied Territories. Military orders regulate every detail of Palestinian life
(Halper et al. 26). Not surprisingly, the regulations dealing with the ruling groups are completely
different. In the case of the OPT, two separate and unequal systems of governance pertain to two
separate groups of people; the government backed settlers enjoy full Israeli citizenship, while
Palestinians are stateless and ruled by martial law.
Discriminatory redistributive policies also manifest themselves in similar ways. In both
cases, expropriation of land played central roles. The Natives Land Act (1913) and the Urban
Areas Act (1923) effectively confiscated black South Africans land and redistributed it to
whites. Likewise, Israel passed the Absentee Property Law (1950) and Development Authority
(Transfer of Property Law) Law (1950) which also confiscated Palestinian property and
redistributed it to Jewish citizens. A suite of other policies were also implemented in order to
expropriate lands from Palestinians in practically every region within Israel and the OPT; the
state proffered various reasons for having to do so, stemming from security reasons to public
interest. For example, The Israeli government used a law called the Land (Acquisition for
Public Purposes) Ordinance in order to confiscate 1,200 dunams in and around Nazareth in
1954, claiming that the seized land would indeed be used in public interest. In the end, only 9 per
cent of the land was used for government offices, the rest was used to create a Jewish
community (White 52).
Patronage policies have predominantly been in the favor of the advantaged group. In
South Africa, legal measures granted whites the most valuable and productive real estate. In
Israel/Palestine, patronage measures have greatly benefited Jewish citizens to the detriment of its
Arab citizenry. As previously discussed, the Law of Return (1950) and Nationality Law (1952)
allowed Jews residing anywhere in the world to settle in the state of Israel, while simultaneously
20

disenfranchising Palestinians. In Israel, many other measures confer great benefits upon Jews in
a discriminatory manner, such as granted by The Absorption of Former Soldiers Law (1994).
Inequalities are also highlighted via the selective nature of patronage policies, whereby
administrative officials spend disproportionately more on their Jewish citizenry than Arab. For
example, the author of Separate and Unequal relates the case of the sanitation department in
Jerusalem: Each year the sanitation department drew up its budget request as if it were
servicing the whole city and then proceeded to spend nearly all the money on Jewish
neighborhoods (Cheshin 156).
Lastly, as regards constituent policies, Israel has enacted several discriminatory laws. The
World Zionist Organisation Jewish Agency (Status) Law (1952) grants the WZO sweeping
powers in relation to the development and settlement of the country. David Kretzmer,
professor of international law at the Hebrew University, describes the discriminatory effect the
relationship between the state and WZO has on Palestinian/Arab citizens of Israel: The Arab
citizens of Israel are entirely excluded from the process, whether as decision-makers or as
beneficiaries. This means not only that no new Arab agricultural settlements have been
established in Israel since independence, but that basic services in Arab villages lag far behind
those in all new rural [Jewish] settlements (115).
In conclusion, there is a preponderance of evidence that confirms Israel as a modern-day
apartheid state. All of the aforementioned inhumane acts and legal measures of the state of Israel
fall squarely within the definition as proffered by the Apartheid Convention of 1973. In line with
the crime of apartheid, said inhumane acts and measures have apparently been put into place for
the sole purpose of establishing and maintaining domination by one racial group of persons
(Israeli Jews) over another racial group of persons (Palestinian Arabs).
21

WORKS CITED

Amir Cheshin, Bill Hutman, and Avi Melamed. Separate And Unequal: The Inside Story of
Israeli Rule in East Jerusalem. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1999.
Badran, Amneh. Zionist Israel and Apartheid South Africa: Civil society and peace building in
ethnic-national states. New York, NY: Routledge, 2010.
Bishara, Marwan. Palestine/Israel: Peace or Apartheid. London, UK: Zed Books Ltd, 2001.
Checkpoints, Physical Obstructions, and Forbidden Roads. BTselem. 16 Jan 2011
<http://www.btselem.org/freedom_of_movement/checkpoints_and_forbidden_road0>.
Dugard, John. International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of
Apartheid. United Nations. 2008 <http://untreaty.un.org/cod/avl/ha/cspca/cspca.html>.
East Jerusalem man, denied residency by Israel, effectively prisoner in own home. Haaretz.
24 April 2012 <http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/east-jerusalem-man-denied
residency-by-israel-effectively-prisoner-in-own-home-1.426249>.
Halper, David, et al. The Apartheid Wall in Palestine: A Searing Journey into Israels Genocidal
Intentions and Practices against the Palestinian People. Amman, Jordan: Alahlia, 2009.
Israel demolishes Bedouin village for 39th time. Maan News Agency. 25 June 2012
<http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=498678>.
Kretzmer, David. The Legal Status of Arabs in Israel. Oxford, UK: Westview Press, 1990.
Legal Violations of Arab Minority Rights in Israel. Shfaram, Israel: Adalah, 1998.
Occupied Palestinian Territory. Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre. 30 June 2011.
<http://www.internaldisplacement.org/idmc/website/countries.nsf/(httpEnvelopes)/D3751
098532D955DC12574B8002F931D?OpenDocument>.
22


Tilley, Virginia. Beyond Occupation: Apartheid, Colonialism and International Law in the
Occupied Palestinian Territories. London, UK: Pluto Press, 2012.
Tessler, Mark. A History of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, 2nd Edition. Bloomington, IN:
Indiana University Press, 2009.
White, Ben. Apartheid: A Beginners Guide. London, UK: Pluto Press, 2009.
UNCTAD Assistance to the Palestinian People: 2011 Report. United Nations. 24 Aug. 2011
<http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=39373&Cr=palestin&Cr1>.












23



APPENDIX


[ISRAEL] LAW OF RETURN, 5710-1950*
Right of
aliya(1).
1. Every Jew has the right to come to this country as an oleh
(1)
.
Oleh's
visa.
2.
(a) Aliyah shall be by oleh's visa.
(b) An oleh's visa shall be granted to every Jew who has expressed his desire
to settle in Israel, unless the Minister of Immigration is satisfied that the
applicant
o (1) is engaged in an activity directed against the Jewish people; or
o (2) is likely to endanger public health or the security of the State.
'0leh's
certificate.
3.
(a) A Jew who has come to Israel and subsequent to his arrival has express his
desire to settle in Israel may, while still in Israel, receive an oleh's certificate.
(b) The restrictions specified in section 2(b) shall apply also to the grant an
oleh's certificate, but a person shall not be regarded as endangering public
health on account of an illness contracted after his arrival in Israel.
Residents
and
persons
born in this
country.
4. Every Jew who has immigrated into this country before the coming into force of
this Law, and every Jew who was born in this country, whether before or after the
coming into force of this Law, shall be deemed to be a person, who has come to this
country as an 'oleh under this Law.
Implementa-
tion and
regulations.
5. The Minister of Immigration is charged with the implementation of this Law and
may make regulations as to any matter relating to such implementation and also as to
the grant of oleh's visas and oleh's certificates to minors up to age of 18 years.

DAVID BEN-GURION
Prime Minister
MOSHE SHAPIRA
Minister of Immigration
YOSEF SPRINZAK
Acting President of the State
Chairman of the Knesset



* Passed by the Knesset on the 20th Tammuz, 5710 (5th July, 1950) and published in
Sefer Ha-Chukkim No. 51 of the 21st Tammuz, 5710 (5th July, 1950), p. 159; the Bill
and an Explanatory Note were published in Hatza'ot Chok No. 48 of the 12th
Tammuz, 5710 (27th June, 1950), p. 189.
(1)
Translator's Note: aliya means immigration of Jews, and oleh (plural: olim) means
a Jew immigrating, into Israel.
24



[ISRAEL] NATIONALITY LAW, 5712-1952*
PART ONE: ACQUISITION OF NATIONALITY
Preliminary.
1. Israel nationality is acquired-
by return (section 2),
by residence in Israel (section 3),
by birth (section 4) or
by naturalisation (section 5 to 9).
There shall be no Israel nationality save under this Law.
Nationality
by Return.
2.
(a) Every 'oleh** under the Law of Return, 5710-1950
(1)
, shall become an
Israel national.
(b) Israel nationality by return is acquired-
o (1) by a person who came as an 'oleh into, or was born in, the
country before the establishment of the State - with effect from the
day of the establishment of the State;
o (2) by a person having come to Israel as an 'oleh after the
establishment of the State - with effect from the day of his
'aliyah**;
o (3) by a person born in Israel after the establishment of the State -
with effect from the day of his birth;
o (4) by a person who has received an 'oleh's certificate under
section 3 of the Law of Return, 5710-1950 - with effect from the
day of the issue of the certificate.
(c) This section does not apply-
o (1) to a person having ceased to be an inhabitant of Israel before
the coming into force of this Law;
o (2) to a person of full age who, immediately before the day of his
'aliyah or the day of his 'oleh's certificate is a foreign national and
who, on or before such day, declares that he does not desire to
become an Israel national;
o (3) to a minor whose parents have made a declaration under
paragraph (2) and included him therein.
Nationality
by Residence
in Israel.
3.
(a) A person who, immediately before the establishment of the State, was
a Palestinian citizen and who does not become a Israel national under
section 2, shall become an Israel national with effect from the day of the
25

establishment of the State if -
o (1) he was registered on the 4th Adar, 5712 (1st March 1952) as an
inhabitant under the Registration of Inhabitants Ordinance, 5709-
1949
(2)
; and
o (2) he is an inhabitant of Israel on the day of the coming into force
of this Law; and
o (3) he was in Israel, or in an area which became Israel territory
after the establishment of the State, from the day of the
establishment of the State to the day of the coming into force of
this Law, or entered Israel legally during that period.
(b) A person born after the establishment of the State who is an inhabitant
of Israel on the day of the coming into force of this Law, and whose father
or mother becomes an Israel national under subsection (a), shall become
an Israel national with effect from the day of his birth.
Nationality
by Birth.
4. A person born while his father or mother is an Israel national shall be an Israel
national from birth; where a person is born after his father's death, it shall be
sufficient that his father was an Israel national at the time of his death.
Naturali-
sation.
5.
(a) A person of full age, not being an Israel national, may obtain Israel
nationality by naturalisation if -
o (1) he is in Israel; and
o (2) he has been in Israel for three years out of five years
proceeding the day of the submission of his application; and
o (3) he is entitled to reside in Israel permanently; and
o (4) he has settled, or intends to settle, in Israel, and
o (5) he has some knowledge of the Hebrew language, and
o (6) he has renounced his prior nationality or has proved that he
will cease to be a foreign national upon becoming an Israel
national.
(b) Where a person has applied for naturalisation, and he meets the
requirements of subsection (a), the Minister of the Interior, if he thinks fit
to do so, shall grant him Israel nationality by the issue of a certificate of
naturalisation.
(c) Prior to the grant of nationality, the applicant shall make the following
declaration:
"I declare that I will be a loyal national of the State of
Israel."
(d) Nationality is acquired on the day of the declaration.
26

Exemption
from con-
ditions of na-
turalisation.
6.
(a)
o (1) A person who has served in the regular service of the Defence
Army of Israel or who, after the 16th Kislev, 5708 (29th
November 1947) has served in some other service which the
Minister of Defence, by declaration published in Reshumot, has
declared to be military service for the purpose of this section, and
who has been duly discharged from such service; and
o (2) a person who has lost a son or daughter in such service, are
exempt from the requirements of section 5 (a), except the
requirement of section 5 (a) (4).
(b) A person applying for naturalisation after having made a declaration
under section 2 (c) (2) is exempt from the requirement of section 5 (a) (2).
(c) A person who immediately before the establishment of the State was a
Palestinian citizen is exempt from the requirement of section 5 (a) (5).
(d) The Minister of the Interior may exempt an applicant from all or any
of the requirements of section 5 (a) (1), (2), (5) and (6) if there exists in
his opinion a special reason justifying such exemption.
Naturalisa-
tion of
husband
and wife.
7. The spouse of a person who is an Israel national or who has applied for Israel
nationality and meets or is exempt from the requirements of section 5 (a) may
obtain Israel nationality by naturalisation even if she or he is a minor or does not
meet the requirements of section (5) (a).
Naturali-
sation Minors.
8. Naturalisation confers Israel nationality also upon the minor children of the
naturalised person.
Grant of
Nationality
to Minors.
9.
(a) Where a minor, not being an Israel national, is an inhabitant of Israel,
and his parents are not in Israel or have died or are unknown, the Minister
of the Interior, on such conditions and with effect from such day as be
may think fit, may grant him Israel nationaiity by the issue of a certificate
of naturalisation.
(b) Nationality may be granted as aforesaid upon the application of the
father or mother of the minor or, if they have died or are unable to apply,
upon the application of the guardian or person in charge of the minor.

PART TWO: LOSS OF NATIONALITY
Renunciation
of Nationality.
10.
(a) An Israel national of full age, not being an inhabitant of Israel , may
27

declare that he desires to renounce his Israel nationality; such renunciation
is subject to the consent of the Minister of the Interior; the declarant's
Israel nationality terminates on the day fixed by the Minister.
(b) The Israel nationality of a minor, not being an inhabitant of Israel,
terminates upon his parents' renouncing their Israel nationality; it does not
terminate so long as one of his parents remains an Israel national.
Revocation of
Naturalisation.
11.
(a) Where a person, having acquired Israeli nationality by naturalisation -
o (1) has done so on the basis of false particulars; or
o (2) has been abroad for seven consecutive years and has no
effective connection with Israel, and has failed to prove that his
effective connection with Israel was severed otherwise than by his
own volition; or
o (3) has committed an act of disloyalty towards the State of Israel, a
District Court may, upon the application of the Minister of the
Interior, revoke such person's naturalisation.
(b) The Court may, upon such application, rule that the revocation shall
apply also to such children of the naturalised person as acquired Israel
nationality by virtue of his naturalisation and are inhabitants of a foreign
country.
(c) Israel nationality terminates on the day on which the judgment
revoking naturalisation ceases to be appealable or on such later day as the
Court may fix.
Saving of
Liability.
12. Loss of Israel nationality does not relieve from a liability arising out of such
nationality and created before its loss.

PART THREE: FURTHER PROVISIONS
Interpre-
tation.
13. In this Law -
"of full age" means of the age of eighteen years or over;
"minor" means a person under eighteen years of age;
"child" includes an adopted child, and "parents" includes adoptive parents;
"foreign nationality" includes foreign citizenship, and "foreign national" includes
a foreign citizen, but does not include a Palestinian citizen.
Dual
nationality
and dual
14.
(a) Save for the purposes of naturalisation, acquisition of Israel nationality
is not conditional upon renunciation of a prior nationality.
28

residence. (b) An Israel national who is also a foreign national shall, for the purposes
of Israel law, be considered an Israel national.
(c) An inhabitant of Israel residing abroad shall, for the purposes of this
Law, be considered an inhabitant of Israel so long as he has not settled
abroad.
Evidence of
Nationality.
15. An Israel national may obtain from the Minister of the Interior a certificate
attesting his Israel nationality.
Offence.
16. A person who knowingly gives false particulars as to a matter affecting his
own or another person's acquisition or loss of Israel nationality is liable to
imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to fine not exceeding five
hundred pounds, or to both such penalties.
Implementa-
tion and
regulations.
17.
(a) The Minister of the Interior is charged with the implementation of this
Law and may make regulations as to any matter relating to its
implementation, including the payment of fees and exemption from the
payment thereof.
(b) The Minister of Justice may make regulations as to proceedings in
District Courts under this Law, including appeals from decisions of such
Courts.
Repeal,
adaptation
of laws and
validation.
18.
(a) The Palestinian Citizenship Orders, 1925-1942
(3)
, are repealed with
effect from the day of the establishment of the State.
(b) Any reference in any provision of law to Palestinian citizenship or
Palestinian citizens shall henceforth be read as a reference to Israel
nationality or Israel nationals.
(c) Any act done in the period between the establishment of the State and
the day of the coming into force of this Law shall be deemed to be valid if
it were valid had this Law been in force at the time it was done.
Commence-
ment.
19.
(a) This Law shall come into force on the 21st Tammuz, 5712 (14tb July,
1952).
(b) Even before that day, the Minister of the Interior may make
regulations as to declarations under section 2(c)(2).

MOSHE SHARETT MOSHE SHAPIRA
29

Minister of Foreign Affairs Minister of the
Interior
YOSEF SPRINZAK
Chairman of the Knesset
Acting President of the State



* Passed by the Knesset on the 6th Nisan, 5712 (Ist April, 1952). and published in
Sefer Ha-Chukkim No. 95 of the 13th Nisan, 5712 (8th April, 1952), P. 146; the
Bill was published in Hatza'ot Chok No. 93 of the 22nd Cheshvan, 5712 (21st
November, 1951), p. 22.
** Translator's Note: 'oleh and 'aliyah mean respectively a Jew immigrating, and
the immigration of a Jew, into the Land of Israel.












30

[SOUTH AFRICA] The Natives' Land Act [No. 27, 1913.]
TO Make further provision as to the purchase and leasing of Land by Natives and other Persons
in the several parts of the Union and for other purposes in connection with the ownership and
occupation of Land by Natives and other Persons.
Be it enacted by the King's Most Excellent Majesty, the Senate and the House of Assembly of
the Union of South Africa, as follows: --
1. (1) From and after the commencement of this Act, land outside the scheduled native areas
shall, until Parliament, acting upon the report of the commission appointed under this Act, shall
have made other provision, be subjected to the following provisions, that is to say: --
Except with the approval of the Governor-General --
a. a native shall not enter into any agreement or transaction for the purchase, hire, or other
acquisition from a person other than a native, of any such land or of any right thereto, interest
therein, or servitude thereover; and
b. a person other than a native shall not enter into any agreement or transaction for the purchase,
hire, or other acquisition from a native of any such land or of any right thereto, interest therein, or
servitude thereover.
(2) From and after the commencement of this Act, no person other than a native shall purchase,
hire or in any other manner whatever acquire any land in a scheduled native area or enter into
any agreement or transaction for the purchase, hire or other acquisition, direct or indirect, of any
such land or of any right thereto or interest therein or servitude thereover, except with the
approval of the Governor-General.
(3) A statement showing the number of approvals granted by the Governor-General under sub-
sections (1) and (2) of this section and giving the names and addresses of the persons to whom
such approvals were granted, the reasons for granting the same, and the situation of the lands in
respect of which they were granted, shall, within six weeks after the commencement of each
ordinary session of Parliament, be laid upon the Tables of both Houses of Parliament.
(4) Every agreement or any other transaction whatever entered into in contravention of this
section shall be null and void ab initio.
2. (1) As soon as may be after the commencement of this Act the Governor-General shall appoint
a commission whose functions shall be to inquire and report --
a. what areas should be set apart as areas within which natives shall not be permitted to acquire or
hire land or interests in land;
b. what areas should be set apart as areas within which persons other than natives shall not be
permitted to acquire or hire land or interests in land.
c. The commission shall submit with any such report --
i. descriptions of the boundaries of any area which it proposes should be so set apart; and
ii. a map or maps showing every such area.
31

(2) The commission shall proceed with and complete its inquiry and present its reports and
recommendations to the Minister within two years after the commencement of this Act, and may
present interim reports and recommendations: Provided that Parliament may by resolution extend
(if necessary) the time for the completion of the commission's inquiry. All such reports and
recommendations shall be laid by the Minister, as soon as possible after the receipt thereof, upon
the Tables of both Houses of Parliament.
3. (1) The commission shall consist of not less than five persons, and if any member of the
commission die or resign or, owing to absence or any other reason, is unable to act, his place
shall be filled by the Governor-General.
(2) The commission may delegate to any of its members the carrying out of any part of an
inquiry which under this Act it is appointed to hold and may appoint persons to assist it or to act
as assessors thereto or with any members thereof delegated as aforesaid, and may regulate its
own procedure.
(3) The reports and recommendations of the majority of the commission shall be deemed to be
the reports and recommendations of the commission: Provided that any recommendations of any
member who dissents from the majority of the commission shall, if signed by him, be included in
any such report aforesaid.
(4) The commission or any member thereof or any person acting as assistant, or assessor, or
secretary thereto may enter upon any land for the purposes of its inquiries and obtain thereon the
information necessary to prosecute the inquiries. The commission shall without fee or other
charge have access to the records and registers relating to land in any public office or in the
office of any divisional council or other local authority.
4. (1) For the purposes of establishing any such area as is described in section two, the Governor-
General may, out of moneys which Parliament may vote for the purpose, acquire any land or
interest in land.
(2) In default of agreement with the owners of the land or the holders of interests therein the
provisions of the law in force in the Province in which such land or interest in land is situate
relating to the expropriation of land for public purposes shall apply and, if in any Province there
be no such law, the provisions of Proclamation No. 5 of 1902 of the Transvaal and any
amendment thereof shall mutatis mutandis apply.
5. (1) Any person who is a party to any attempted purchase, sale, hire or lease, or to any
agreement or transaction which is in contravention of this Act or any regulation made thereunder
shall be guilty of an offence and liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding one hundred pounds
or, in default of payment, to imprisonment with or without hard labour for a period not exceeding
six months, and if the act constituting the offence be a continuing one, the offender shall be
liable to a further fine not exceeding five pounds for every day which that act continues.
(2) In the event of such an offence being committed by a company, corporation, or other body of
persons (not being a firm or partnership), every director, secretary, or manager of such company,
32

corporation, or body who is within the Union shall be liable to prosecution and punishment and,
in the event of any such offence being committed by a firm or partnership, every member of the
firm or partnership who is within the Union shall be liable to prosecution and punishment.
6. In so far as the occupation by natives of land outside the scheduled native areas may be
affected by this Act, the provisions thereof shall be construed as being in addition to and not in
substitution for any law in force at the commencement thereof relating to such occupation; but in
the event of a conflict between the provisions of this Act and the provisions of any such law, the
provisions of this Act shall, save as is specially provided therein, prevail:
Provided that --
a. nothing in any such law or in this Act shall be construed as restricting the number of natives who,
as farm labourers, may reside on any farm in the Transvaal;
b. in any proceedings for a contravention of this Act the burden of proving that a native is a farm
labourer shall be upon the accused;
c. until Parliament, acting upon the report of the said commission, has made other provision, no
native resident on any farm in the Transvaal or Natal shall be liable to penalties or to be removed
from such farm under any law, if at the commencement of this Act he or the head of his family is
registered for taxation or other purposes in the department of Native Affairs as being resident on
such farm, nor shall the owner of any such farm be liable to the penalties imposed by section five
in respect of the occupation of the land by such native; but nothing herein contained shall affect
any right possessed by law by an owner or lessee of a farm to remove any native therefrom.
7. (1) Chapter XXXIV of the Orange Free State Law Book and Law No. 4 of 1895 of the Orange
Free State shall remain of full force and effect, subject to the modifications and interpretations in
this section provided, and sub-section (1) (a) of the next succeeding section shall not apply to the
Orange Free State.
(2) Those heads of families, with their families, who are described in article twenty of Law No. 4
of 1895 of the Orange Free State shall in the circumstances described in that article be deemed to
fall under the provisions of Ordinance No. 7 of 1904 of that Province or of any other law
hereafter enacted amending or substituted for that Ordinance.
(3) Whenever in Chapter XXXIV of the Orange Free State Law Book the expressions "lease"
and "leasing" are used, those expressions shall be construed as including or referring to an
agreement or arrangement whereby a person, in consideration of his being permitted to occupy
land, renders or promises to render to any person a share of the produce thereof, or any valuable
consideration of any kind whatever other than his own labour or services or the labour or
services of any of his family.
8. (1) Nothing in this Act contained shall be construed as, --
a. preventing the continuation or renewal (until Parliament acting upon the report of the said
commission has made other provision) of any agreement or arrangement lawfully entered into
and in existence at the commencement of this Act which is a hiring or leasing of land as defined
in this Act; or
33

b. invalidating or affecting in any manner whatever any agreement or any other transaction for the
purchase of land lawfully entered into prior to the commencement of this Act, or as prohibiting
any person from purchasing at any sale held by order of a competent court any land which was
hypothecated by a mortgage bond passed before the commencement of this Act; or
c. prohibiting the acquisition at any time of land or interests in land by devolution or succession on
death, whether under a will or on intestacy; or
d. preventing the due registration in the proper deeds office (whenever registration is necessary) of
documents giving effect to any such agreement, transaction, devolution or succession as is in this
section mentioned; or
e. prohibiting any person from claiming, acquiring, or holding any such servitude as under Chapter
VII, of the Irrigation and Conservation of Waters Act, 1912, he is specially entitled to claim,
acquire, or hold; or
f. in any way altering the law in force at the commencement of this Act relating to the acquisition of
rights to minerals, precious or base metals or precious stones; or
g. applying to land within the limits in which a municipal council, town council, town board, village
management board, or health committee or other local authority exercises jurisdiction; or
h. applying to land held at the commencement of the Act by any society carrying on, with the
approval of the Governor-General, educational or missionary work amongst natives; or
i. prohibiting the acquisition by natives from any person whatever of land or interests in land in any
township lawfully established prior to the commencement of this Act, provided it is a condition of
the acquisition that no land or interest in land in such township has at any time been or shall in
future be, transferred except to a native or coloured person; or
j. permitting the alienation of land or its diversion from the purposes for which it was set apart if,
under section one hundred and forty-seven of the South African Act, 1909, or any other law, such
land could not be alienated or so diverted except under the authority of an Act of Parliament; or
k. in any way modifying the provisions of any law whereby mortgages of or charges over land may
be created to secure advances out of public moneys for specific purposes mentioned in such law
and the interest of such advances, or whereunder the mortgagee or person having the charge may
enter and take possession of the land so mortgaged or charged except that in any sale of such land
in accordance with such law the provisions of this Act shall be observed.
(2) Nothing in this Act contained which imposes restrictions upon the acquisition by any person
of land or right thereto, interests therein, or servitudes thereover, shall be in force in the Province
of the Cape of Good Hope, if and for so long as such person would, by such restrictions, be
prevented from acquiring or holding a qualification whereunder he is or may become entitled to
be registered as a voter at parliamentary elections in any electoral division in the said Province.
9. The Governor-General may make regulations for preventing the overcrowding of huts and
other dwellings in the stadts, native villages and settlements and other places in which natives are
congregated in areas not under the jurisdiction of any local authority, the sanitation of such
places and for the maintenance of the health of the inhabitants thereof.
10. In this Act, unless inconsistent with the context, --
"scheduled native area" shall mean any area described in the Schedule to this Act;
"native" shall mean any person, male or female, who is a member of an aboriginal race or tribe
of Africa; and shall further include any company or other body of persons, corporate or
unincorporate, if the persons who have a controlling interest therein are natives;
34

"interest in land" shall include, in addition to other interest in land, the interest which a
mortgagee of, or person having charge over, land acquires under a mortgage bond or charge;
"Minister" shall mean the Minister of Native Affairs;
"farm labourer" shall mean a native who resides on a farm and is bona fide, but not necessarily
continuously employed by the owner or lessee thereof in domestic service or in farming
operations:
Provided that --
a. if such native reside on one farm and is employed on another farm of the same owner or lessee he
shall be deemed to have resided, and to have been employed, on one and the same farm;
b. such native shall not be deemed to be bona fide employed unless he renders ninety days' service
at least in one calendar year on the farm occupied by the owner or lessee or on another farm of
the owner or lessee and no rent is paid or valuable consideration of any kind, other than service, is
given by him to the owner or lessee in respect of residence on such farm or farms.
A person shall be deemed for the purposes of this Act to hire land if, in consideration of his
being permitted to occupy that land or any portion thereof --
a. he pays or promises to pay to any person a rent in money; or
b. he renders or promises to render to any person a share of the produce of that land, or any valuable
consideration of any kind whatever other than his own labour or services or the labour or services
of his family.
11. This Act may be cited for all purposes as the Natives' Land Act, 1913.