Had an early start of a perfect morning, as early as 6.45 AM my daily arrival in office which to me is a time to reflect and plan for the day. Didn’t have anything in mind of what to write today! But after listening to Chris Foot on Capital breakfast 98.4 talking about his weekend trip to Zimbabwe, it got me thinking and voila! An idea came up! The battle for land in Zimbabwe! I have quite a number of Zimbabwean friends which of course grew after the concluded Big brother Amplified, having played the role of an Administrator for Wendall Parson’s victory. Now rehabilitated from BBA, lets talk about the land issue in Zims like most people commonly refer to Zimbabwe or Zimbo! Quite a number of articles, books and reports I went through this morning in our well equipped resource center and found interesting information about land both in Kenya and Zims. My focus this morning and the question I ask myself..is who owns the land? But will focus my attention on Zims first
The story of Zimbabwe today is a story of conflict over land between whites and blacks. It is a conflict that has dragged a once-prosperous country down to a level where it now constitutes a danger to its own self. It is also a story deeply rooted in the colonial history of Africa.
The colonial period marked a dramatic turn in the use of land in Africa. This revolution is responsible for the recurrence of land crises throughout post-colonial Africa. Irrespective of the period in history or the mode of production in question, land has always held a central position in the production process. In Africa where agriculture has always been the dominant economic activity, land has directly accounted for the survival of generations. However, as a result of European penetration and conquest of Africa, the land tenure system in Africa changed significantly. Before colonial rule, the land was still the main source of livelihood for Africans despite the ravages of the slave trade. Colonialism, however, reversed this trend
For sure, white settlers in Zims have my sympathy too, imagine waking up one day only to find your home and livelihood purloined by Government cronies. According to the UK Prime Minister Tony Blair's government, £44m had been provided for Zimbabwe's land reform since 1980, and much of the redistributed land has so far ended up in the hands of cabinet ministers and other government officials. Mr Mugabe argues that the farmers' British ancestors stole the land when they occupied the country in 1890 and named it Rhodesia. As a result of colonial policies, land ownership is very unbalanced in Zimbabwe. Critics said that the land reform would destroy the country's economy, which is based on agriculture. Agriculture still remains the main driver of Zimbabwe’s economy for the foreseeable future and the British government has played a role in helping restore the Zimbabwe economy by supporting a land policy based on law and benefits for all Zimbabweans.
Land reform in Africa was the logical response to colonial land excision. Throughout Africa, there was hardly any anti-colonial struggle which was not directly or indirectly related to the land. It was for this reason that land reform processes proved very problematic in former settler colonies like Kenya, South Africa and Zimbabwe where settler interests had been greatly entrenched. Land reform processes went peacefully in some countries where colonial constitutions managed to restrain even the most disgruntled sectors of the African population. This was the case with the Lancaster Constitution of Kenya, South Africa and Zimbabwe. The “willing-seller, willing-buyer” clause of this constitution offered protection to white land owners in these countries even after colonial rule. It was not the case in Zimbabwe however, when President Robert Mugabe decided to abrogate the Lancaster Constitution and its exploitative “willing seller, willing buyer clause.”
It takes hard work to make land farmland. Land ownership and control is indeed a tricky issue. When Robert Mugabe took power in 1980, the biggest challenge awaiting him was the wide gap in land ownership between whites and blacks. He started by enacting laws to meet the government’s goal of reclaiming as much land as possible from whites and redistributing them to blacks. This reclamation resembled land sequestration in that both were preceded and sanctioned by law. Land reclamation in Zimbabwe went through three distinct phases. The first phase was the Constitutional phase which ran from 1980 to 1990. The second phase was the Transitional phase and it ran from 1990 to 1997. The last stage began in 1997 and there are signs that land seizures are still going on in Zimbabwe. It is an issue hotly contested by the government and opposition.
The transitional phase of land reforms saw a gradual drift from the Lancaster Constitution. It also saw a significant increase in opposition to land reforms especially from land owners. It began with a constitutional amendment in 1990 which allowed for the purchase of land at government set prices without right of appeal. This was followed in 1992 by the promulgation of the Land Acquisition Act (of 1985) into law. It aimed principally at removing the “willing-seller, willing-buyer” barrier. As a follow up of the 1992 Land Acquisition Act, the government in 1997 published a list of 1,471 farms it intended to buy compulsorily for redistribution. By this Act, land owners were given 30 days to submit written objections. As he drifted towards forceful land seizures, Mugabe faced protests from the law courts which insisted that the bureaucratic process of acquiring land had been bridged. He therefore took steps to replace defiant court judges with loyal ones.
As Mugabe showed signs of radicalism, Britain gradually withdrew aid and accused him of giving the land to his cronies. 1997 marked the end of British financial assistance to Mugabe’s reform program. On his part, Mugabe accused the British government of reneging on its promises made at Lancaster. The result was unbridled radicalism in land seizures.
It is difficult to tell when land seizures will end in Zimbabwe as long as Mugabe lives. For now, what has not escaped the eyes of the world is the suffering of ordinary Zimbabweans as a result of the tussle between Mugabe and the West. We all long for a united Africa where we can prosper as a united nation and stand up to the rest of the world and feed and house our people…
So much information that am yet to read and research about Land issues in Africa. been challenged by colleagues to read more about international law to be conversant with some of the clauses. bet I have lots of homework to do. scholars have written and researched a lot that I can't exhaust in a day! The Debate about Controversial Land Reforms under Robert Mugabe continues to rage on He defends his reforms on grounds of equality while his detractors see them as instruments of revenge pure and simple.is it a reality perspective?
Sources: Patel, Hasu H and H.H.H Bila. “The last becomes the first. The transfer of power in Zimbabwe” in Prosser Gifford and Roger Louis (eds) Decolonization and African Independence the Transfer of power, 1980.
Ranger, Terence O. (ed). Aspects of Central African History, 1968
Fowale, Tongkeh Joseph. “The Politics of Land Reforms in Zimbabwe 1980-2005: International Responses” 2007.
No comments:
Post a Comment