The Sunday News
President Mnangagwa has reiterated time and again that there is need to respect the country’s Constitution and rule of law. He has also made it clear that the New Dispensation will respect property rights, as the law demands, and also in order to attract investment.
This means that Zimbabwe also respects conventions it is a signatory to as well as agreements it signed with other parties. As rightly put by the Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of Information, Publicity and Broadcasting Services, Mr Nick Mangwana, in an article, which we run in this issue, anything short of this would leave potential investors and funders jittery as it would not guarantee the security of investments.
The announcement by Government that it would compensate farmers who lost farms during the Land Reform exercise as per the dictates of the Constitution, with some farmers being compensated for improvements they made on the land and some getting compensation for the land as well, as per their respective categories, should be seen in the light of following the Constitution and doing the right thing. The move, as explained by Government, is not a reversal of the Land Reform Programme, but bringing the whole process to its logical conclusion.
Last week, Government reiterated that the Land Reform Programme was irreversible and there would be no major disruptions to agriculture as only a few indigenous farmers were likely to be affected by re-allocations, while a mere 37 farms covered by Bilateral Investment Promotion and Protection Agreements (BIPPAS) would be offered back to farmers who were dispossessed.
Lands, Agriculture, Water and Rural Resettlement Minister Dr Anxious Masuka said only indigenous farmers who were dispossessed of their properties during the Land Reform Programme and those covered under BIPPAs, would have the opportunity to get their land back.
The Government classifies indigenous farmers as people of Zimbabwean origin who were previously marginalised before 1980 and had acquired land either through direct purchase or through Government commercial farm schemes before the land revolution. These farmers would either get their land back or get full compensation for the agricultural land acquired and improvements that were done on the farms.
Section 295 (1) subsection 2 of the Constitution also provides for the full compensation of persons whose agricultural land was acquired, yet it was protected.
“There is no confusion because the Constitution of Zimbabwe is very clear, Section 295 subsection 1 and subsection 2 that we have an obligation to compensate for land and improvements for indigenous Zimbabweans who constitute only 1,3 percent of the 18 600 farmers that were allocated land. We also have an obligation under the Constitution, to consider the BIPPAS and Bilateral Investment Treaty and those constitute just under one percent of the 18 600 beneficiaries. Those fall in the category that the SI 62 of 2020 clearly explains. When an application is lodged with the minister, there is consideration whether in the public interest and security of the country there is merit in doing so. Where it is no longer possible then compensation is offered,” he said.
In addition, responding to questions in Parliament last week from MDC Alliance Harare East legislator Mr Tendai Biti, Minister of Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs, Ziyambi Ziyambi said the pronouncement on compensation for white former commercial farmers was not a reversal of the Land Reform Programme.
“What we are doing now is to bring closure to the Land Reform Programme so that we move forward and focus on production,” he said.
The revolutionary land redistribution programme embarked upon by the Government from 2000 to date has been a most powerful and effective tool of empowering the previously disadvantaged black population of Zimbabwe. In order to render the land redistribution programme irreversible in practical terms and to bring finality to the land question, it was incumbent on Government to expedite the issuance of permits to the more than 350 000 households who benefited under the A1 scheme and granting of 99-year leases to the more than 19 000 beneficiaries under the A2 scheme.
