The quickest and most effective way to redistribute land is to apply the willing seller willing buyer principle.
Given that I have a plot of land that someone else wants and is prepared to pay a price that satisfies my estimate of worth, the deal is a done deal.
Given, alternatively, that the state forces a price for my land that does not satisfy my estimate of worth, I am likely to resist the deal to the fullest extent of the law. The deal is not a done deal and could take decades to be realised, if at all, through the Land Claims Court, this because if all the anticipated land claims were adjudicated by the Land Claims Court, and that does not presuppose all claims would be approved by the court, that august body might be sitting for the next three hundred years.
For a dose of realism, check out the Daily Maverick’s article on the new Property Valuation Act and the law of unintended consequences.
By contrast, a Direct Democracy Forum (DDF) administration would apply the willing buyer and willing seller principle with enthusiasm, energy and alacrity, to every claim it felt warranted state intervention in the land redistribution process. Everyone would be a winner, including the tax-payer, because there would be fewer disputed restitution transactions and more satisfied buyers and sellers and lower costs overall, and it would all happen within decades rather than within centuries.