Chapter 4 Learning from experience: An overview of the evidence: Reviewing Restitution, LRAD and Commonage from a SIS perspective

3 Restitution 3.9 Project support interventions 3.9.1 Project summaries 3.9.1 Reboile, Limpopo

Background information The Legodi were removed from the Reboile area in 1960 and resettled at Solomondale, Naledi and Ga-Mashashane.10 The Reboile community submitted its claim for two farms in 1998. The claim was settled in 2002 in favour of 476 households. The community established the Reboile Trust, which has 734 registered beneficiaries. A portion of the land has been planted with proteas which the previous owners were growing for export. However, the dominant economic activity is mining. As part of the settlement agreement, the trust entered into a 99-year renewable lease agreement with Anglo Platinum (Amplats) which enabled the mining company to build a smelter on the remainder of portion 6 and portion 49 of the restored property and extract unlimited water. Amplats paid an amount of R4 million and promised further benefits including employment and small business opportunities. Since the signing of this agreement, conflict has broken out concerning the validity of the verification process in respect of some members. In 2005, seven applicants approached the High Court for an order to disband the trust since it contained a significant number of people whom the applicants alleged were not valid claimants. The High Court initially found in favour of the applicants, but this was overturned on review. The final court order had the effect of expanding the number of trustees to include both the incumbents and the applicants. SDC intervention and key strategic issues Similar to the Mamahlola situation described above, this case highlights the utmost importance of verifying members and clarifying their rights. The verification process appears to have been left up to the claimants who apparently decided to include people in the claim who could be of assistance to them. Clearly, where large amounts of money are involved and there are economic opportunities, institutional development support to clarify rights and benefits, competent management, a clear investment/utilisation plan and transparent financial systems are essential. Once the Reboile Trust had been registered and the land had been transferred, the ability of the RLCC and the PLRO to intervene was limited. The fact that this matter related to a trust meant that the membership dispute could only be adjudicated by the High Court. The court's ruling did not address the issues in terms of the Restitution Act, and it could hamstring the practical functioning of the trust because the new arrangement does not mitigate the risk of the conflict being carried over into its day-to-day management. Key spatial and functional integration issues Very few other role-players are involved in this project. The RLCC has monitored the membership issue. The PDoA's support is limited to monitoring the land planted to protea, but harvesting has ceased. The municipality is not currently involved. The internal dispute over membership and the subsequent court case has signalled to other role-players that this is a high-risk project best left alone. Key social, capacity and institutional development issues As with many claims, the key issue is clarification of membership and the rights and benefits to which community members are entitled. The original ‘do-it-yourself' verification process appears to have led directly to conflict and allegations that the project has been hijacked by outsiders. The RLCC is trying to encourage the trustees to step down so that new elections can be held, and it is planning a ‘re-verification' process to develop a firm membership list. Of key concern is the failure of the trustees to produce financial reports identifying how income from leases has been utilised. There is also no clarity on tenure arrangements on the remaining agricultural land. Some land has apparently been leased to livestock farmers but there was no evidence of signed leases. In a context where there is no development plan for the land and community, it follows that rights, benefits and obligations of members of the community (beneficiaries) have not been clarified. Key NRM and human settlement issues With no development plan, the management of natural resources has not been addressed. A large portion of the land is held by Amplats under a 99-year lease and used for mining and processing. All these activities are subject to government regulation, but close monitoring is required to ensure long term sustainable use. At present there are no definite plans for a housing settlement and it is unclear what the community is likely to want to do. There is no evidence that any evaluation of environmental issues has taken place as part of the claim settlement process. This will be a critical element of the development plan taking into account current land use activities (a platinum smelter) and surrounding activities (mining), their impact on the environment and the suitability of the farms for settlement purposes. Key livelihood and enterprise issues Upon transfer of the land to the Reboile Trust, some members took over a protea cultivation business on the property. This activity, supported by the PDoA, could have produced significant income for the trust. However, as a result of the conflict, the protea project was abandoned. The trust has entered into lease agreements with outside parties to use portions of their land. In the absence of financial statements, the tax implications for the trust are unclear at this stage. Nonetheless, there is a steady source of income from investing the money from the lease. Used wisely, this could fund significant development initiatives either on-farm or off-farm.