Table of headlines

1. Uyawuz' umoya?

Redistribution

2. At what stage is the DLA?

3. Du Toit hands over title deeds to emerging farmers

4. Land reform crucial for social transformation and economic justice

5. Gunuza targets the Umtata market

6. Acquisition of farm brings excitement to the Duba Family

7. Emerging farmers agree that farming is unpredictable

8. Sisonke an impressive venture

9. Joint ventures key to transformation

Restitution

10. Du Toit emphasises working together

11. Struggle for land ends for Bakgaga-Bakopa

12. The Motswenyanes assemble at Wildebeestpan

13. Napos walk on their land again

General news

14. Can every South African own land individually as envisaged by the Constitution?

15. Wage increases will hurt agriculture - warn farmers

16. Namibia's land reform process questioned

17. Special report on Namibian land reform

18. Labour federation welcomes farm expropriation policy

19. Rwandan militias accused of killing 12 farmers in South Kivu

Uyawuz’ umoya?

I do not remember the title of the song. But as I was striding through Burger’s Park in Pretoria the other morning I thought about one of Ol’ Blue Eyes’ (Frank Sinatra) love songs. It has a line that talks about one being a flower and the other party being obliged to give the flower water. "Give me water to drink", he croons. As I arrived at the office I came to the conclusion that it must have been the beauty of the vegetation in the park that set my mind on Ol’ Blue Eyes’ music.

As I paged through the newspapers of that day I noticed that many of their pages contained articles on water. I later heard that that week was Water Week. Our sister department, the Department of Water Affairs was taking a lead in highlighting the importance of water.

Needless for me to repeat what was said about water during that week. But all I had read made me think about my recent visit to the eastern side of the northern part of the Eastern Cape. At that time rains were plentiful. Crops in the fields were a marvel to see and I prayed that no locusts would arrive before harvest time. The cattle and sheep I saw were in excellent condition.

But, beneficiaries of land reform impressed upon me that droughts can sometimes create havoc in the area. They said droughts last for long periods of time. At those times their stock just dies like flies. There is no way they can nurture their crops. When the dry season comes, veld fires become the order of the day and hunger stares them in the eye.

From the Eastern Cape my mind ran to the Northern Cape. In February I was in Askham. The area is very dry and hot. There are many thorn trees and shrubs. I did not come across any fields. I was told the area is good for cattle and goat breeding. One of the camps that I drove across had many drinking pans. I was told the water is drawn from underground and water is a scarcity there. That afternoon dark clouds assembled in the sky and within minutes there was lightening and thunder. Perhaps by now you may think that a heavy rain followed. No, just a few drops, which evaporated, even before they hit the ground.

Beneficiaries here were open about water being a hindrance in their farming activities. Because of the dry nature of the area they are compelled to buy fodder for their stock elsewhere. If water was easily available they would be planting it themselves. They mentioned that those closer to the Orange and Molopo Rivers are better off because they have a chance of embarking on irrigation. They also mentioned that when the rivers burst their banks, things do not improve much. But they agreed that while there are some disadvantages because water is plentiful, without water, survival becomes a battle.

On that Northern Cape visit, my mind had drifted way back to the seventies, when the American soul music band, the House Rockers’ song " I wish it would rain" was a hit. At that time soul music was the "in thing". I remember clearly that one of the song’s line says, "I wish it would rain, Sunshine, blue skies please stay away, I wish it would rain". I am sure many people in semi-arid and dry areas, echo those words.

Before drifting to another musical thought, may I suggest that all of us have to take good care of our water. Whether we live in the Kalahari or in the forests in Knysna and George. It is an open secret that when we do not look after our water resources, consequences will be too dire to contemplate.

Please do not counter my thoughts about Johnny Nash’s song "I can see clearly now". I am sure you remember that it goes on and states that "The rain is gone, There are no obstacles in my way". Elsewhere the song would be valid. In this instance, I’m sure you will agree with me that it is irrelevant.

Do I have to say more? I do not think so. "Uyawuz’ umoya?"

Top

DLA Deputy-Minister, Dirk Du Toit, at Elliot in the Eastern Cape recently told a media briefing that the Department of Land Affairs is now at a stage where it has showed that it can deliver rapidly. He said the delivery on land reform of the Queenstown District Land Reform Office can be replicated in other areas of the country and there is no doubt that the pace can be maintained.

"What we need in the immediate future is a programme of assuring success. That is not easy and you may remember that right across the world there are reported failures on land reform", he reasoned.

He alluded to the fact that the success of land reform depends on agricultural performance. He amplified this by stating that in many a case land reform happens in rural communities and that means immediately land has been transferred to emerging farmers, extension services have to be visible there.

"We now have to deepen our land reform programme to address poverty. I also believe that the smaller farmer you are, the more capital and technology you need. I have seen many people without matriculation certificates being successful in modern agriculture", he said.

He declared that the DLA is geared to deliver land, but the challenge is what happens after land delivery. He made mention of the fact that the state cannot do it alone, but can only succeed with mentorships or joint ventures with other stakeholders.

"Commercial farmers in South Africa can succeed in agriculture when they participate in land reform", he said.

The DLA Director-General, Dr Gilingwe Mayende, mentioned that the projects handed over at Elliot demonstrate the critical role the Department plays in providing land to emerging farmers. He complemented this by highlighting the major role played by land reform in alleviating poverty and opening up opportunities for economic development.

"In this area we have a juxtaposition of successful and subsistence farming. People around here love farming, and unless we inject the necessary inputs for projects in this area, we will fail. We do not want to venture into half-done jobs", he said.

"Both the Departments of Agriculture and Land Affairs will continue to engage in activities that support beneficiaries. The beneficiaries will own their land under the individual freehold title tenure", he said.

Answering a question, Advocate Du Toit said presently there are no specific incentives for farmers to be involved in joint ventures. He confirmed that incentives will be put in place before long, but will be provided for in a well-planned programme.

In his response to another question on the threat of land invasion by the Landless People’s Movement (LPM) at Uitenhage in the Eastern Cape, the Chief Land Claims Commissioner, Mr Tozi Gwanya, said the LPM is making it difficult to work with. He cited the fact that many of their leaders own land.

"There are a lot of contradictions in what they say. In Limpopo, as an example, they say they will be encouraging all their members to vote while their leaders are saying people must not vote", he said.

He also highlighted that some people are still confined to the homeland system of land allocation. This means that those domiciled in the former homelands want to own property only in those areas and not outside them. In the same vein they do not want others coming from other areas to own property in those areas.

Top

DLA Deputy Minister, Advocate Dirk Du Toit handed over title deeds to 115 emerging farmers at Elliot in the Eastern Cape in March. These farmers coming from towns in the northern part of the Eastern Cape received their title deeds under the Land Redistribution for Agricultural Development programme of the Department of Land Affairs.

Advocate Du Toit said the peaceful land reform programme is successful and the government will not change its approach in providing land to those who had no access to land in the past. He said those threatening about invading land saying that the government has failed to deliver, are lying and do not know what is happening on the ground.

"There is a lot of land that has been handed over here. If you were to ask me what must be done here, I would say we must deepen the quality of our projects by producing on our land. No land must lie fallow here", he said.

"It has been proven that to develop emerging farmers is a mammoth task. What we have to do is to work together with other stakeholders. What is the use of giving people land when they cannot reach their markets because of the bad condition of roads?", he asked.

He noted that all spheres of government must support agriculture. The government could not do it alone because it needs the support of the private sector.

He agreed that there has to be incentives for established farmers that assist emerging farmers. He promised that the process has to be formalised and added that that could not be the subsidies of the past.

"I am sure that the emerging farmers are the commercial farmers of the future", he concluded.

The Department’s Director General, Dr Gilingwe Mayende said the positive remarks expressed earlier by Messrs M I L Ferreira and Gary Vorster on land reform in South Africa made him happier than before the event. He said they both agree that land reform is crucial for social transformation in this country.

He told the beneficiaries that it was encouraging to see vegetables from the projects displayed at the event. The vegetables included maize, potatoes, spinach, carrots, cabbages and lettuce.

In extending his support to the emerging farmers, Mr M I L Ferreira from AgriEC, said agriculture is the backbone of economic development in the Eastern Cape. He said it is also important for sustainable development.

"There can be no peace in South Africa without land reform and it has to be done speedily and efficiently. This will require hard work from the government, the commercial and emerging farmers ", he said.

He commended government officials for making land reform a success. He urged the government to render after care support to the emerging farmers while pledging their support to the emerging farmers.

Mr Xolile Ngqameni of the Eastern Cape Agricultural Economic Business Chamber (ECAEBC) said in the past two weeks he had been looking at the media with keen interest as they previewed that day’s event. He said in the print media there were remarks made that the government had done nothing for land reform in the country and in some circles there were suggestions that people should invade land.

"We are against land invasions. It is also not true that the government has done nothing for land reform. We will be lying if we say we are witnesses to the failure of the government to deliver on land reform", he said.

Mr Gary Vorster from the Potato Growers from Ugie commended the DLA for trying to champion land reform in their area. He said potatoes require a lot of capital.

"In my view for emerging farmers to be successful, there has to be mentorship to impart skills. Emerging farmers must be given management and financial skills", he said.

"I want to see the products of the farmers reaching the markets. Because of that I know that money will return to their pockets in the end", he added.

One of the beneficiaries, Mr Tasi Mahuzi said he wanted to corroborate those saying the DLA is giving access to land to people who go to its offices. He said there are people who want to own land but do not know where to go.

"In my village I am spreading the word and I wish all of us in this room could be doing that in all the areas we live in. Access to land only needs us to go to the DLA’s offices", he said.

The youth of the area entertained those present with music, gum-boot and traditional dancing. In their fold there were some praise singers who kept the audience on its toes with their oration.

Top

The Department of Land Affairs believes that a successful land reform programme is crucial for social transformation and economic justice. Most political parties would agree that it is a national priority. It is therefore appropriate that the Department of Land Affairs and the beneficiaries of land reform celebrate their achievements and progress towards this national goal.

Land reform has faced many challenges and criticisms. It is not our intention to dwell on these but rather to point out some of the important achievements so far, in the Eastern Cape in general and in these districts in particular, as well as to point out some of the challenges that still need to be addressed here in the Eastern Cape.

No one doubts the extent to which the Eastern Cape was devastated by colonial dispossession and apartheid misrule. Deprivation of access to land as well as systematic denial of access to credit and markets for the majority were central tenets of both the colonial and apartheid periods.

Whereas colonial wars of dispossession, the extension of colonial boundaries and settlement of immigrant farms left some room for some Black farmers, commercial and/or peasant, to manage to continue to farm, the successive Land Acts from the late 19th century onwards squeezed the remaining farmers out of business and into the reserves and bantustans or into wage labour.

In the late 19th century, following the discovery of diamonds and gold, it was Black farmers who produced the bulk of the food for the new towns and cities which developed at Kimberley and Johannesburg. It was only through the Land Acts and related measures that Black farmers were throttled as a class.

What we are celebrating here today is the beginning of the process to redress the gross injustices of the past in respect of land and to help Black farmers once again to become major contributors to the agricultural economy.

This is not a simple and easy task and it will not be achieved overnight. But we are here today to celebrate what all of us here have achieved in the past few years, in the Eastern Cape as a whole and in particular in these 6 districts.

Since 1994 the Eastern Cape Land Reform Office has delivered some 200 land redistribution projects in the North Eastern Cape stretching from Dordrecht to Mount Fletcher, along and on both sides of the old Transkei border, and including the magisterial districts of Lady Frere (Cacadu), Indwe, Engcobo, Elliot, Tsolo and Maclear.

Most of these projects have been finalised in the last 2 ½ years, since the launching of the Land Reform Redistribution for Agricultural Development (LRAD) sub-programme.

To date some 50 364 hectares have been transferred and a further 31 787 is approved for transfer and/or about to be transferred in these 8 districts.

These projects represent about 25% of the total land redistribution projects in the Eastern Cape. They represent a deliberate strategy to focus on this area as an area of fairly high agricultural potential close to the densely populated and land hungry rural areas of the Transkei.

Many of the beneficiaries are people who have been farming under difficult circumstances in the communal areas or as lessees. Others are former farm workers who are now becoming independent farmers. All are now getting their own land under individual freehold tenure.

These 200 projects are all land redistribution projects. 94 involve the acquisition of private land on the basis of willing-buyer and willing-seller and are partially financed by grant funding under LRAD. These projects are in the districts of Dordrecht, Indwe, Elliot and Maclear, formerly outside of but adjacent to the Transkei.

The other 106 projects involve the disposal of freehold state land in the former Transkei at Pitseng, Umnga Flats, Beestekraal and Guba. This is land which was acquired by the former SADT by expropriation in the 1970s and early 1980s. It was then consolidated into the Transkei and leased out for agricultural purposes. Some of these lessees were serious farmers, others were not and abandoned the farms to the farm workers. These farms are now being sold to these former lessees and farm workers who have been farming effectively.

It is the belief of the ECLRO that land reform must cater for a variety of needs for land. LRAD in particular, has in this region been aimed at individuals who already have some involvement in the agricultural economy and who need their own land in order to grow their agricultural endeavours to provide an improved livelihood and to contribute to agricultural production and the rural economy.

In this regard 16 of the LRAD projects involve former farm workers who have now become owners of their own land, either the farm on which they were formerly employees, or nearby farmland.

A further 32 of the projects involve beneficiaries who have been farming under difficult circumstances in the communal areas of adjacent Transkei districts who have now acquired their own freehold land across the old Transkei boundary.

We believe that these beneficiaries are best placed to take full advantage of the grant assistance provided by the DLA and to make a meaningful contribution to the agricultural sector.

Turning to the disposal of the state farms, again the beneficiaries are people well placed to make the best agricultural use of these farms. They are either former lessees who can now make more intensive use of the farms, or they are former farm workers who have made the best use of the farms according to their abilities.

I must however sound a word of caution to the beneficiaries of these state farms. In a number of areas, notably Port St Johns, Ongeluksnek as well as Beestekraal, the latter included in these celebrations, beneficiaries have been very slow to raise the necessary purchase price and to have ownership registered in their names. The disposal of state land is a priority of the President, the Minister and the Department. Beneficiaries failing to take transfer and not meeting their financial obligations will have the sales revoked and the farms will be offered to other eager buyers. This is not an idle threat.

DLA in the Eastern Cape

The Queenstown Land Reform Office was opened and became operational in 1999. Before the opening of this office, this area was serviced by ECLRO offices in Port Elizabeth and East London. During that period, the grant system that was used was largely SLAG and each project had to be approved by the Minister in person. Land reform implementation was slow and as a result only 4 projects were completed during this period.

LRAD was introduced in 2001 together with substantial delegations of authority to ECLRO to allow for project and grant approval at ECLRO level. As a direct result, land reform has accelerated enormously, from only 39 approved projects in 2000/1 prior to the delegations, to 139 thus far in 2003/4. The main areas of focus of land reform in these districts have been LRAD and disposal of state land.

From the side of the ECLRO, the projects we are celebrating here today are the joint efforts of a number of officials. I have already mentioned the Queenstown Land Reform Office which is responsible for all land redistribution projects in the areas covered by both the Ukahlamba and Chris Hani District Municipalities. The Queenstown Office is lead by Deputy Director Ms Malerato Nkonyane. The disposals of state land at Beestekraal and Umnga Flats were initially managed by Mr Dali Matta who is now the Deputy Director leading the Amatola Land Reform Office. Mr Zwelebanzi Mayekiso in our Umtata Land Reform Office has done excellent work in taking the Pitseng farms to the point of disposal. Ms Pashee Roboje has taken the disposal of the Guba farms to this point.

Much of what we are seeing here today is the product of the joint efforts of a number of role-players and stakeholders, not just the various offices of the ECLRO.

We do not as a department work on our own or in isolation. We work very closely with the various formations of organised agriculture, at provincial and local levels, with Municipalities at both local and district levels and with the Land Bank and Provincial Department of Agriculture to name but a few.

Not a single project we see here today has not been screened by an inter-departmental committee convened by the relevant District Land Reform Office. Thus each project is assessed in terms of its compliance with municipal priorities and objectives including the Municipal Integrated Development Plans; and in terms of the opinion of the Provincial Department of Agriculture as to the potential and suitability of the land identified and the feasibility and viability of the intended agricultural business, etc.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank all these role-players for their commitment to land reform. We look forward to continuing to work together.

While we have made excellent progress in the Elliot district in particular towards the stated target of redistributing 30% of agricultural land in 15 years, we have not made a good progress in other districts and in other parts of the Province. In Elliot to date we have redistributed 15.3% of the agricultural land. There has been phenomenal progress in just 3 years and has given us a good indication of just what can be achieved with goodwill and hard work.

There is still a lot of work to be done. Fortunately we will soon have a substantially increased budget to do this work. While the Department’s budget for land redistribution for 2004/5 remains at roughly the same level as for the 2003/4 financial year, the budget increases by 44% in 2005/6 and another 38% in 2006/7. In effect the budget doubles from R308 m in 2004/5 to R614 m in 2006/7.

In addition we are glad that the National Treasury has allocated an amount of R 700 million over three years to the Provincial Departments of Agriculture to enable the Provincial Departments to play a more substantial role in supporting the LRAD sub-programme.

The ECLRO anticipated capital expenditure for 2003/4 is R 62.5 million, most of which is used for grant assistance towards the cost of land acquisition, and some for critical capital equipment and infrastructure. The Treasury allocation to the Provincial Department of Agriculture should add at least another R26 million per annum to this budget, taking the total budget to close to R90 million per annum.

Top

Mziwonke Hepson Gunuza, an emerging farmer from Elliot in the Eastern Cape sees the recently opened Umtata Market as one of their target clients for their farm produce. This emerged when Land News visited his farm in March.

Gunuza told Land News that they first occupied Krom Draai at Elliot in July 2002 as the Mrwetyana-Gunuza Family Trust. In acquiring the land, which measures 688 hectares in extent, they were assisted by the Department of Land Affairs through the Land Redistribution for Agricultural Development programme.

Gunuza has had no previous experience of  farming before but believes that growing up in a rural community and looking after his parents’ stock and taking care of their maize and corn fields gave him enough foundation to opt for commercial farming. He agrees that farming has countless challenges, which sometimes cannot be predicted.

He went on and explained that immediately after their arrival on the farm there was a snowstorm that destroyed almost everything. He admitted that they had never bargained for a disaster like that.

"As a result of the snowstorm our farm does not have a shed. We are not sure where we will be storing our products from the fields. We spent a lot of money refurbishing the house which was inhabitable after the snowstorm", he said.

"Our tractors and other farm implements were damaged by the boom spray and that has created a number of problems. I think if we can get some assistance to recover from that we will be able to create more jobs on the farm. I would not object even if the government could volunteer in that regard", he appealed.

The Trust specialises in maize, potatoes and cabbages. Currently there are 180 head of cattle and 195 sheep on the farm.

"We began with a small number of stock here. Even though it is a bit too early, I vouch that there is a light at the end of the tunnel", he said.

When asked about their Trust’s markets, Gunuza revealed that he has a fruit and vegetable enterprise in neighbouring Engcobo, which takes the bulk of their farming produce. He re-iterated that the recently opened Umtata Market is their prospective client and they are intent on reaching an agreement with it.

In advising other emerging farmers he said it was good for people to grab the opportunities offered by the DLA. But he was critical of those receiving land from the government and let it lie dormant for ages without making an effort to use it profitably. He suggested the government to have a relook at people who do not use their land.

The Trust consists of two households, which are the Mrwetyana and Gunuza families, which consist of 17 family members. Both families are from a previously disadvantaged background.

There are 14 grazing camps on the farm. The quality of grass is considered good.

About 20 hectares of dryland have good irrigation potential. There are about 100 hectares which can be used as dryland.

The farm has a plentiful water supply and there are four stock dams there.

The previous owner of the farm, A E Sprenger, wanted R 450 000-00 for Krom Draai, but ultimately sold it at the valuation price of R385 000-00.

Top

Driving with Tandazile Duba on his family’s farm at Elliot in the Eastern Cape, as he showed me around, was interesting. His excitement on their new acquisition was no different to that of a child after receiving a well-treasured gift from a grandparent.

At that moment Tandazile was showering the government with praise. He was very vocal that he does not believe that his family would ever have owned a farm without the assistance of the government.

His enthusiasm is displayed by the fact that even though they occupied the farm last year in November, they already have 350 sheep and 47 cattle. Tandazile agreed that they are faced with a number of challenges on the farm.

For starters in many places the fence is rotten and needs replacement. There are no ploughing fields on the farm to provide for the stock and the area is often drought-stricken.

The way Tandazile talks about caring for the sheep and cattle suggests that he does not see the challenges as stumbling blocks in the way of making their farming venture a success. He goes on and on telling his listener how many times he has given medicine to his sheep and how many times he takes his cattle to the dip.

He knows animal diseases prevalent in the area and the seasons in which they strike.

In February he spoke about seeking hay and lucerne to feed his stock in winter. Elliot is at the foot of the Drankensberg Mountains which are often blanketed with snow in winter for long periods of time.

The property acquired by the Dubas is Lagg Farm at Elliot measuring 461 hectares in extent. The Provision of Land and Assistance Act, No 126 of 1993 and the Land Redistribution for Agricultural Development programme was used by the Queenstown District Land Reform Office to assist the family in getting the land.

The Duba family consists of three males and two females that are emerging farmers. Before getting the farm, the family farmed at the Guba state farms in Indwe with livestock and crops.

The family of five members is from a previously disadvantaged background.

The farm is divided into eight fenced camps. The Centsu River runs through the farm and can be described as a reservoir of water. Stock water is provided from earth wall dams.

The land has been registered in the name of the Duba Family Closed Co-operation. Members of the CC are to share profits and losses equally. They will jointly manage the day to day running of the farm, but Tandazile is the principal manager.

The selling price of the property was R255 000. In terms of the LRAD policy, the family qualified for a subsidy of R270 740.

Top

Emerging farmers in the northern district of the Eastern Cape agree that they are faced with a mammoth task because farming is an unpredictable venture. Many mention that in their area farming is compounded by the prevalence of veld fires, stock theft, droughts, jackals and bad roads.

But, despite their understanding of the negative complexity of farming their spirits are high and they are ready to face the challenges of their trade. In a visit in February to the towns in the area I met some on their farms acquired through the Department of Land Affairs’ Land Redistribution for Agricultural Development programme.

I first met George Mahuzi at Indwe and reaching his farm is not a simple task because of the road leading to his farm. It has rocky patches that seem not to have been travelled before, wet patches that had the car sliding and a number of gates that include those not easy to open.

He specialises in beef cattle farming and is optimistic that he will make it in the end. He explains his farming experience as having been gathered over the years from his grandfather’s farm, leasing a farm and ultimately buying one.

"I now have 80 head of cattle. I was compelled to sell some during the past months and perhaps if you had come earlier you would find me with a handsome number", he said.

"As emerging farmers we have a very healthy working relationship with the established commercial farmers around here", he declared.

My next stop was Ida where I met William Nkuhlu who chairs a family farming project. I am not exactly sure about the distance between his farm and the main road, but 40 kilometres could be a good guess.

I lost count of the number of small bridges we had to cross before reaching his farm. While the signposts along the road were displaying 80 kilometres for travelling on that gravel road, my guess is that they may have been put there ages ago and the correct speed for that road cannot be above 40 kilometres.

From his farmhouse the scenery is beautiful and I suspect that we were at the foot of the Drankensberg Mountains. We could see his 19 cattle across the river at the mountain, but fetching them there could take another hour and we had no time spare.

He complained about the wattle trees that keep on mushrooming around the area. As we were coming to his farm some of the trees had been swept over the bridges by the rain, plentiful at that time.

By the time we arrived at Elliot, it was late afternoon and Vuyani Qina was on his tractor ploughing his fields. His 153 sheep and 35 cattle were being counted.

He told us that he had moved onto the farm in November 2003. He said his major challenge was to establish himself on the farm.

We drove to the Mpumalanga Communal Property Association close by, which is a farming venture run by 16 former farm workers. I spoke to 57 year old Florence Kholiwe Sombo, Deputy Secretary of the Association who told me that fate has her own ways of changing a situation.

"I was born here and later became a farm worker and never thought that would ever change. It is unbelievable that today I am one of the owners of this farm and I am sure that this is really going to change my life forever", she informed me.

"I am thankful for all that has happened here. When we were farm workers we could not develop ourselves regardless of the potential we possessed", she added.

Jackson Mfinyezi, one of the beneficiaries of the Association, told me that he does not know his age but is sure that in 1940 he was an elderly boy ploughing the fields there. He was reluctant to tell me the number of his cattle and merely said he had a few – but I was to be later told by others on the farm that his cattle were more than 30.

The following morning, as we started the Barkly Pass, we made a detour to the Mwanda Family Farm where we were met by Siphelele Mwanda who told us that they have 102 cattle on the farm. He said there are sheep and goats that they have in Indwe but at that stage they could not bring them to the farm because of jackals.

His brother, Mlungiseleli had a pocketful of jokes and there was no way of avoiding laughing that morning.

In Ugie, at Phakamani Farmers, we came into contact with Robert Magayana who is the treasurer of their venture. He took us through their impressive maize fields and told us that it will be ready for harvesting in May.

He admitted that they have teething problems but believes that they can be overcome. He said with the advice of a neighbouring commercial farmer, Rob Farrington, he sees success for their project.

On the last day of the visit, we arrived at the Baza Family farm while Khumshile Baza was busy repairing a tractor. He said they were desperately in need of the farm map to ascertain its boundaries, and emphasised that there was no dispute about them.

He told us that they began their project in October 2003 and at that time they had 22 head of cattle, 3 goats, 32 sheep and 13 geese. He added with a smile that the geese were initially 36 but the other 23 had been sold because there was a demand for them in the market.

Because of the nature of the road to a neighbouring farm, we were forced to walk but luckily got a tractor lift from Wilson Hanjana whom we were visiting. His experience in farming revolves around growing on the surrounding farms and being a farm worker.

"As a farm worker I could not do as I wished but had to dance to the music of my employers. Being a farm owner is like a dream to me and I am trying to implement all my innovative ideas so that I do not disappoint my government. I also want to be another success story", he said.

"I would like to encourage all those who get these opportunities to exploit them to the full. Chances like these are one in a million", he quipped with seriousness written all over his face.

Our last stop was at the Cewu Family Farm in Indwe and brothers Thabo and Maxin warmly welcomed us there. Thabo told us that, among other things, they plant cabbages, pumpkins, butternuts, beans and onions. Their market is the neighbouring villages and Indwe town.

At the ploughing fields the butternuts and pumpkins were ready for the market.

"We have 70 cattle excluding the 21 calves, 230 sheep and four horses now", he said.

Top

Considering that Sisonke (Willows) Farming Business Trust at Ugie in the Eastern Cape started its operations in September 2003, with its vast fields of cabbages, potatoes and maize, it is an impressive venture. Land News saw this when it visited the project in February.

In the hive of activity there, Land News met Buys Tshobonke, a member of Sisonke, who took the team around while explaining that at that time they had not encountered any problems in the project. He said water for their plants was plentiful.

He indicated that they have not yielded any crops but there are some cabbages that they have sold. "There were some orders that were placed with us and the cabbages sold like hot cakes. Our book-keeper is reconciling her books and we will then know how far we have travelled", he said.

"Our markets are in the surrounding towns of Barkly East, Elliot, Indwe, Maclear, Ugie itself and many parts of the former Transkei area. All our clients buy in bulk", he added.

When asked about his advice to someone considering venturing into crop farming, he said it would be difficult for him to give it in a few words. He said his preference would be to sit down and have a brotherly talk with the person over a number of days.

He described these talks as a series of sessions that would take the prospective farmer around their project. He said he would suggest to the person to also work with him for a couple of weeks or months in their project so that the person can understand farming.

"Above all, one has to be dedicated to crop farming", he said.

It also transpired that the project employs 24 women to cultivate weeds among the cabbages. Later on Rob Farrington who is a partner in Sisonke, revealed that when they are harvesting they would employ about 100 seasonal workers.

Farrington is an established commercial farmer and in this venture is in partnership with some of his farm workers. When Tshobonke was asked why were they still under the employment of Farrington, when they had their own farm that they could be running, he replied that it was too early to do that. He added that perhaps, when the project has established itself, they will consider working on their project fulltime.

Tshobonke also told Land News that, "We have faith in Farrington and we do not believe that he can cheat us".

When Land News spoke to Farrington, he agreed that at that time the project had no problems. He said from his side he believed that in its infancy their project must not distribute profits, rather it should keep them for the future.

Farrington seems to have a very harmonious relationship with his partners. They hold him in high esteem and there were no suspicious indicators from his side. He is one of the biggest maize and potato producers in the region.

Furthermore, Farrington is working with the Umnga Flats emerging farmers and is a key informer of the President’s Team on assisting the emerging farmers in the area. He also conducts workshops about potato growing to interested parties on behalf of the Department of Land Affairs.

This project results from the approval of the provision of financial assistance for the acquisition of land for agricultural purposes in terms of Act No 126 of 1993. The land for the project consists of Belmont Farm measuring 240 hectares and Mount Elton Farm measuring 102 hectares in Ugie.

In terms of the LRAD programme, each member contributed their full labour to the amount of  R5 000,00 per individual, which qualified for an LRAD grant of R20 000-00 per member. The farm-working group pooled their R20 000-00 x 33 members totalling R660 000-00 together and agreed to equal membership sharing.

The balance of grant to the amount of R60 000- 00 was to be utilised to buy the essential assets for the group to start up a husbandry project.

Robert Farrington approached the Queenstown District Land Reform Office during November 2002 to assist his farm workers to purchase the adjacent farm belonging to T Forward.

The beneficiaries are 33 farm workers with strong family relations and with more than 20 years of living and working experience on Farrington’s land and other farms in the area.

Twenty-three of the farm workers employed are full time on the properties and the other ten members are either partners or children of the employed. All 33 members are dependent on jobs from Mr Farrington’s farms and he appoints seasonal workers from the pool of his existing farm working families.

Sisonke (Willows) Farmers Trust has been registered as a Trust. Out of the 33, there are 16 families and 14 women beneficiaries. They are well trained and schooled in extensive farming operations.

The main farming activity is irrigation and dry land cropping. The farm is 343 hectares in extent, 172 hectares grazing land, 118 hectares for dry land crop production and 54 hectares for irrigation.

There are two earth dams, 10 fountains and a river passing through the property. There is an established dam in the river with a catchment area of 126 square kilometres, with a capacity of 200 000 cubic metres. The wall is constructed with concrete and is 7 metres high. There is enough water to put 54 hectares under permanent irrigation.

The dam is also well known for it’s fish species and the beneficiaries are keen to explore this option.

The Trust nominated Messrs T Tshobonke and Z Vena as their managers to steer the project. The farm worker families have the necessary practical and lower management skills to make the project a success.

An executive committee is in place as a supporting structure. The above-mentioned gentlemen are well trained in farming and have successfully completed various certificates in farming operations. The group shares profits and losses equally.

Top

The stability of South African agriculture is going to be determined by the actions of government and experienced farmers over the next few years. At the moment the government and the Department of Land Affairs are successfully purchasing many farms for emerging farmers. This will positively affect the racial imbalance of ownership of commercial farms.

I believe that addressing and changing the racial imbalance of farmers producing the majority of crops in South Africa will be much more difficult. It is estimated that the best 25% of South African farmers produce over 75% of the present crop production. These are the farmers that are expanding their production and are economically active. This is due to the economies of scale and experience which ensures the correct management decisions. Crop production is highly capital intensive and mainly farmers with experience and capital are succeeding with economically sustainable production.

Emerging farmers must be given the opportunity to learn and produce crops, which are economically sustainable. This can only be achieved if the emerging farmers, government and the best commercial farmers of South Africa combine to ensure the success of the new entrants into crop production. The government is at present spending huge amounts of money on food stability in the rural areas with emerging farmers. In the Eastern Cape alone ± R100 million will be used for production. These projects are involving small-scale farmers, mainly with areas of 2 to 50 ha of maize. This involvement in agriculture by Government in the more rural areas is very, very good. The rural areas of the north Eastern Cape have some of the poorest people in South Africa, without the prospect of industrial growth and job creation. The present production under way by the Department of Agriculture for crop production will vastly improve the food stability for many people. This is only happening in the more rural areas where mentors are used to control the production. Similar help by government is also needed in the high production crop areas so that black  farmers can quickly start with large-scale crop production. In the high producing areas the best farmers should be invited to be the mentors and partners for new ventures. This will lead to a one-on-one mentorship by people who are the best 25% in the country.

What projects are envisaged for establishing large scale black farmers in South Africa with areas of 100 ha - 1000 hectares of maize or wheat or 100 hectares - 500 hectares of potatoes? Agriculture needs to realise the same change that other industries of South Africa have. This is unfortunately very difficult because the ownership and top management of farms is one person. In industry the change was easier because companies implemented policies of management transformation. Emerging farmers face major obstacles on their way forward in agriculture. The following are some of the easiest to identify.

1. Shortage of capital. Agriculture is a highly capital intensive industry. Potato farming costs R20 000 - R25 000 per hectare under dry land and R30 000 - R35 000 under irrigation. Financial institutions will not lend money to farmers without adequate security and experience. An economically sustainable potato-farming venture would need to produce a minimum 40 - 50 hectares of potatoes per year. This size venture would justify the expense of tractors, lifters, planters etc. This operation would need R1 500 000.
2. Emerging farmers would compete with other experienced farmers on the fresh produce markets. Experience is needed with regards to quality, timing of markets, length of marketing and production, yields etc. These factors determine whether a farmer will stay in large-scale agriculture or rather become a subsistence livestock and vegetable farmer.
3. Economies of scale: Generally the larger the operation the cheaper the unit costs are of equipment etc. Machinery capital costs are too high for very small crop farming operations. This is why, the world over, the larger the operations the stronger the business. Small farms are not economically viable.

The relationship between AgriSA, NAFU and government is a major concern. Each organisation needs the other to reach their common goal, namely, stability in South African agriculture while transformation is effected. Failure to ensure this transformation stability could affect all South Africans as can be seen in other parts of Africa. South Africa needs efficient farmers who represent the entire racial spectrum. The government has continually been saying farming must change, but HOW? How do you establish new economically sustainable farmers when R1 500 000 is needed to start one commercial potato venture and the farmer has no experience? Farmers want change but have either not seen how or are short of capital.

The government should encourage joint ventures between new black farmers and the 25% economically best farmers. Suitable farmers for these ventures should be identified by government through the Land Bank etc. to ensure that success is achieved. These operations should be supported by favourable loans and support. The experienced farmers would have a vested interest in the success of the farming and therefore of transformation as a whole. After a number of years the experienced farmer could be bought out. Nearly 3% of farms change hands each year so availability of land is no problem.

As an experienced farmer myself, I know how difficult it is to succeed in farming. We are watching on the side and are worried that the present ventures for agricultural transformation are not enough. Only with the vision and active involvement of government will change be fast enough and production maintained. Many experienced farmers have the ability to vastly increase production and to teach others. Only the lack of capital and the inability to reach many emerging farmers is holding them back.

These are some of the directions we as farmers in the Ugie area of the North Eastern Cape have taken:

1. Offered lectures and practicals on potato farming in the North Eastern Cape.
2. Initiated and support soup kitchens in our area.
3. Purchased adjacent farms with the help of Land Affairs for farm workers.
4. Have started joint ventures with these new farmers through Land Affairs and Land Bank to produce cabbages, potatoes and beef on a large scale.

Please believe me that only by joint ventures with government, experienced commercial farmers and emerging farmers, will the much needed transfer of knowledge be achieved. Only by each party having vested interest in ventures, will they succeed.

Government needs to initiate the direction and the start of these ventures. The vision and commitment that is now needed is similar to that seen in the early nineties when the ANC had to adopt economic policies for the country. These decisions were taken after the ANC consulted world economic policy makers and private business. The farmers of South Africa are waiting for this direction.

Government should immediately make low interest rate loans available for joint ventures. Land Bank or commercial banks should identify the farmers who would be interested.

This show of confidence by Government would stimulate agricultural production and the economy and decrease the price of food.

These joint ventures are the fastest way to realise successful transformation and the transfer of experience and knowledge without negatively effecting agricultural production. Food is a major expense to 90% of South Africans. Food stability and transformation are both needed by all South Africans.

Emerging farmers need a fair deal when encouraged by a government to farm. At present they are encouraged into an industry without the capital and the experience needed. The Departments of Agriculture and Land Affairs have no experience in sustainable economic production. They should only be the facilitators. Are the mentors presently being used as service providers for the present production schemes people who have succeeded in agriculture?

The farmers who are presently economically successful, need to be involved. Failure by government to use these farmers will have dire consequences for the stability of South Africa.

Top

DLA Deputy Minister, Advocate Dirk Du Toit emphasised the importance of families working together for managing their land better. This, he said during the celebration of the settlement of the Rooipan claim at Roedtan in Limpopo in February.

He urged them to empower themselves by learning new farming methods. It was interesting to hear him explain that the reason black people were removed from farms during the apartheid era was because they were better farmers than their white counterparts.

The Chief Land Claims Commissioner, Tozi Gwanya warned the Rooipan claimants never to take redress lightly because that is where their future lies. He said people must change their mindsets about taking black people to places with no facilities.

It is quite clear that the Rooipan claimants will not be left with empty promises as the government has undertaken to assist them in developing their land.

Mr C Lekalakala representing the claimants, said one of the things that makes life worth living is seeing one’s dreams realised. He said the beneficiaries of Rooipan could relate to that because, the return of their land was a dream come true after four decades of being forcefully removed from the so-called "black spot" area.

The Rooipan claimants lodged their claims individually with the Commission on Restitution of Land Rights before the cut-off date of 31 December 1998. There is a total of 19 groups or families that lodged their claims and 700 individuals will benefit from this.

Direct descendants of the original owners of the farm are the Nkosanas, Semenyas, Manamelas as well as the Lekalakalas. On forced removal forty years ago these families were scattered to different parts of the Limpopo province in places like Swartdam, Hammanskraal, Tiberius, Potgietersrus and Mogalakwena.

The Rooipan Farm is situated in the Limpopo province near the small town of Roedtan.

The farm measures 1 484 hectares in extent and currently farming crops there are mielies, cotton and sunflower.

For the purposes of running the farm a Communal Property Association (CPA) was established. It was agreed within the CPA that the land will be divided into 20 equal portions for the 19 groups, the other portion will be communal property.

The land was acquired by the Department of Land Affairs through negotiations from the former owner, Mr Piet van Zyl, for an amount of R 3 million.

Background

The Rooipan claimants consist of direct descendants of the families who had title deeds and unregistered rights in the farm Rooipan in 1923. Doring River, Sunningdale Farm, Roedtan Road as well as Groothoek Hospital border the farm.

The Rooipan claimants had lived peacefully until the government dispossessed them of their land in 1960. Between 1960 and 1961 the Rooipan claimants were forced to leave the farm after the area was declared a Black Spot in terms of racial laws of the country at that time.

Top

The day the restitution claim of the Bakgaga-Bakopa of Maleoskop near Groblersdal in Mpumalanga was approved, their struggle for repossessing their land ended. According to them, no amount of money can erase the memories of their hurt endured in the past in the fight for their land.

Bakgaga-Bakopa had fought for their land for generations. They were now winning for the second time.

Their struggle over land began in 1860 during the reign of Chief Boleu I. Chief Boleu I was on several occasions approached and visited by early German missionaries with a view to settle in the area and preach Christianity. The missionaries’ stay on the land did not bring peace at all and there was tension between the two groups.

At that time, the government of the Transvaal Boer Republic also had an interest in the area and wanted the land for themselves. Then, a war broke out but the tribe won the battle.

Little did they know that the struggle would be with them for decades to come. The missionaries were on the side of the government of the Transvaal Boer Republic. In later years, a Swazi regiment attacked the Bakgaga-Bakopa and Chief Boleu I was killed.

Bakgaga-Bakopa resisted but many people were killed in that battle and the sons of the king went separate ways while running for safety. Their resistance was not in vain because their direct descendants have now reaped what their forefathers fought for, decades ago.

The Bakgaga-Bakopa claim was lodged by Kgoshi Rammupudu Boleu on 02 May 1997.On the day of celebrating the approval of their claim, descendants of Bakgaga-Bakopa, young and old, from different parts of Limpopo and Mpumalanga provinces, gathered on the Rietkloof Farm, which is one of the portions of Maleoskop.

DLA Deputy Minister, Dirk Du Toit, called for co-operation among the beneficiaries in the use of their land. The land will mainly be used for agricultural purposes at commercial level.

A representative of the claimants, Mr M Morare, said Bakgaga-Bakopa were angered by the damage caused to their property by the previous government. At the time of their dispossession in 1962, improvements had been made on the farm, which they were never compensated for. Electrical appliances were removed as well as water pipes.

A portion of Rietkloof Farm is currently used by the Department of Agriculture. The farm is 4 633 hectares in extent.

The Department of Land Affairs together with other institutions like the Land Bank, have committed themselves to assisting the beneficiaries with post settlement issues. In this regard, a development plan has been drawn and it will be focusing on infrastructure and service provision for the farm.

Approximately 2 640 households will benefit from the claim.

Dinaka, a Sepedi traditional dance, performed by different groups on the day of the celebration kept people entertained.

Top

By Malebo Tau

Direct descendants of the late Paul Tukise Motswenyane assembled in their numbers in March at Wildebeestpan Farm, Potchefstroom in the North-West to celebrate the return of their land through the restitution programme of the Department of Land Affairs. The Motswenyanes were joined in that celebration by the Sebokos, Letlonkanes, Matsoses, Makgales and the Baloyis who suffered the same fate during the era of dispossession in that area.

The families were removed from Wildebeestpan Farm between the years 1941 and 1946 and later between 1956 and 1970. The farm was declared a "black spot" in terms of the legislation of that time and that meant the black owners had to vacate the land.

At the celebration the MEC for Agriculture, Conservation and Environment in North-West, Ms Edna Molewa, made it clear that the restitution programme is intent on redressing the dispossession of people of their land. She explained the Land Redistribution for Agricultural Development (LRAD) programme as aimed, among others, at developing Black commercial farmers.

She further spoke of the Extension of Security of Tenure Act (ESTA) that was promulgated in order in to circumvent farm evictions in South Africa. "Celebrations like these are just one step further in making the lives of our people better. Humiliation, poverty and exploitation will be a thing of the past with the new Restitution of Land Rights Amendment Act, 2003 (Expropriation) having been enacted. This makes the Commission more committed in the acceleration of the restitution programme", she said.

The Department bought the farm on behalf of the 390 claimants for approximately R1.5 million. The amount includes the restitution discretionary grants as well as planning grants. Current owners of the properties concerned, Messrs P Venter, Van der Walt and Ms Soan have agreed to sell.

On the claimants’ side, each family has its own Communal Property Association (CPA) in which, the Department and Provincial Department of Agriculture, Conservation and Environment (NW), will assist with post settlement challenges. On the other hand, the Regional Land Claims Commission (RLCC) will render assistance with restitution discretionary and settlement planning grants.

Daniel Motswenyane who sold his land to Paul Motswenyane in 1916 is the original owner of the farm. Paul Motsuenyane later transferred the land in his will to his sons.

The farm was inherited through the Motswenyane generations until it was declared a "Black spot". No further operations were allowed to take place on the farm and the owners were forced to sell to whites against their will.

Top

By Phumla Khanyile

Once more, after decades of struggling and waiting, the Napo family walked on their land again at Kameelpoort near KwaMhlanga in Mpumalanga without fear or bitterness. This happened when the Mpumalanga Regional Land Claims Commissioner, Nceba Nqana on Valentine’s Day handed them a certificate for the return of their land on their farm.

The land in question is 513 hectares in extent and 99 households will benefit from it.

It was raining while the ceremony went on, but it did not dampen the high spirits of all those present. Many felt the rain was a blessing to the occasion.

In his speech, Nqana acknowledged the hardship brought by dispossession to the Napo family. He said the government is aware that a lot still has to be done to provide land to the formerly disadvantaged in South Africa.

"The DLA has set aside funds for restitution and settlement grants to assist on basic infrastructure and planning. Local and district municipalities in this area together with other stakeholders must see to it that development takes place here", he said.

Adding to what Nqana had said, Bishop Stanley Mogoba, former President of the Pan Africanist Congress of Azania (PAC), said their organisation is happy that the government is adhering to its promise of giving land back to the people.

He said that freedom without land is not complete. "We do not want 13% of South Africa but 100%", he said.

The Napo family first occupied Kameelpoort from around 1800. As a result of the introduction of racial laws the rights of the Napos were reduced from being landowners to labour tenants in their own land.

This dispossession occurred between 1948 and 1965. In that period the Napos were given trek passes by different farm owners and ended up being scattered in places like Pietersburg, Hammanskraal, Soshanguve and Mabopane.

When an opportunity arose to redress their predicament through the restitution programme, the Napo family lodged their claim on 30 December 1998.

On the day of the ceremony, amongst the canopy of trees, smoke was rising as a soft rain fell. As one came closer to the farm, ululating, applause and whistling from both young and old, told one that there was delight on the farm.

It was Valentines Day, and the youth regarded their visit to Kameelpoort Farm as an outing celebrating the day. The elderly remembered the good old days before they were evicted.

As Mafikizolo’s song, "I’m leaving with you sweetie", rose under those trees, and filled the sky the young ones danced, rejoicing their future on the land.

Top

Can every South African own land individually as envisaged by the country’s constitution?

The question as to whether every South African citizen can own land individually as envisaged by the Supreme Law of the country, poses a very interesting question indeed. However, not even the Supreme Law of the country, that is the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, Act 108 of 1996, (hereinafter referred to as the Constitution) provides a clear-cut answer.

Section 25 of the Constitution pre-supposes a right for every South African citizen to own land, individually in the Republic.

The foregoing provision is, however, drastically challenged in the same Constitution by the tenets and principles of Indigenous Law as entrenched and protected in terms of Section 30 and section 211 of the Constitution.

For interest sake: Indigenous Law is that branch of our legal system that regulates practices and laws of the indigenous tribes of Southern Africa namely Sotho, Nguni, Shagana-Tsonga and the Tswana tribes.

All these groups have different legal practices that display enough similarity to be attributed to one common origin: Indigenous Law.

Therefore Section 30 of the Constitution provides that every population group in the Republic has a right to practice their culture and live accordingly.

Section 211 even goes deeper in entrenching the rights of indigenous leadership and their role in preserving Indigenous Law and Administration. At this point, perhaps, it is particularly crucial to highlight the potential conflict, and the can of worms that this section opens!

According to the precepts and the principles of Indigenous Law, it is deeply woven in the fibers of Indigenous Law from the North West and Southern parts of the African Continent that "dominium" or full ownership does not exist in Indigenous Law.

Communal land tenure system is the pivot of indigenous law land dispensation. The main reason being the fact that African Culture (remember section 30) makes no polarity between law on the one hand and religion on the other.

According to African religion: the substance of the earth is the property of the ancestors and therefore the king is the natural custodian and "trustee" of the interests of the ancestors in the land. It is a forgone conclusion therefore that Indigenous Law also emanates from the ancestors and enforced by the king through his hereditary officers namely the paramount chiefs, chiefs, headmen (izinduna).

It is quite interesting to note here that the accession of law into the substance of religion is very fruitful as legal subjects in Indigenous Law are very obedient and very law abiding, lest they incur the wrath of the ancestors!

In a way one may dare say that the king owns the land on behalf of the tribes and communities in Indigenous Law. Each indigenous family is allocated a piece of land for residential purposes (a kraal) and another for planting crops subject to the making of some yearly offering to the headman in the form of a prescribed portion of the crop/produce etc.

The problem now arises due to the equal entrenchment in the Constitution of all these conflicting rights, that is:

• The right of every South African to own land individually in terms of Section 25;
• The right of every population group to practice its culture in terms of Section 30;
• The rights of traditional leaders in terms of Section 211 to be exercised according to indigenous law;
• The obligation placed on all courts in South Africa to apply indigenous law when it is applicable (This is a must).

How do we interpret and apply the various property law provisions given this outlined skein of ambiguities and contradictions in one Constitution?

Section 211(i) – (iii) of the Constitution presupposes that South African citizens in regulated areas by indigenous law may not individually own land because that would be tantamount to a violation of  Indigenous Law culture.

The teething question here is: "Is this state of affairs not in conflict with Section 25 while also Section 9 of the Constitution prohibits unfair discrimination of any kind in South Africa?"

The "discrimination" in Section 211(i) – (iii) is orchestrated by the entrenchment of the indigenous culture in Section 30 of the Constitution. Not even the Repugnance Clause in the Constitution may serve to address this bizarre situation! Forget the limitation in Section 36 of the Constitution. As a matter of interest the Repugnance Clause is the provision, which states that, all rights in the Constitution (i.e. the Bill of Rights, which comprises Chapter 2 of the Constitution) must not be repugnant to the norms and accepted morals of the entire civilized world.

It would suffice to mention here that the recognition and the weight of Indigenous Law have been tremendous throughout South African land tenure history.

As mentioned earlier on, that the king is the "owner" of the land, his "ownership" is not exactly the same as the Western form of "ownership" which is called dominium in the sense that the former holds all the land rights on behalf of the entire tribe and communities thereunder. There is no registration of title, although there are indigenous laws in place for proof of occupation.

As an example:

The head of the agnatic group as head of the entire group of his households in entrusted with the duty to cultivate the land allocated to him by the headmen on behalf of his group and to answer to him in a matter pertinent thereto. The headmen then reports to his immediate chief, the latter to the paramount chief, the latter to the King.

The Indigenous Law courts of the headman and that of the chief or of the paramount chief respectively may be used in the process.

These courts must be used in terms of Section 211 of the Constitution.

Indigenous law, however, has a highly sexist element, in that it follows a practice of patriarchal primogeniture or male primogeniture. This means that only males may occupy important leadership positions in an indigenous society, even in the family sphere.

Even Indigenous Law of Succession only considers males as heirs/legatees. Assets would rather vest in the king if no male successor were available. This is obviously a contravention of Section 9 of the Constitution. Women are perpetual minors until they get married. If the marriage dissolves they return to their pre-marital minority.

Suffice to say that the recognition and the weight of Indigenous Law has been tremendous throughout South Africa land tenure as the ethnic characteristics are prevalent in all legislation dealing with indigenous groups. The Self-Governing Territories Constitution Act 21 of 1971 empowered Legislative Assemblies of all self-governing territories to regulate on their land matter (only KwaZulu and Qwa-Qwa did so).

Even the most recent pieces of legislation are still too vague as to the question of an individual’s right to own land especially in Indigenous Law regulated areas.

Take a good look at the following extracts:

The Upgrading of Land Tenure Rights 112/1991 provides inter alia "...for the transfer of tribal land in full to the tribes concerned.."

Where is the individual/family? There is no individual in Indigenous Law.

The Less Formal Establishment Act 113/1991 provides inter alia "...the regulation of the use of land by tribal communities."

Under Act 113/1991 "A tribe may apply in writing to the Administrator for permission to utilise land that is not existing tribal land according to traditional communal tenure."

"The rights of a tribe member with regard to the erf allocated to him by the tribe will be governed by the Indigenous Law and customs of the tribe concerned."

Again, the communal aspect of Indigenous Law greatly over-shadows the role of the individual.

In rural areas, Proclamation R 293/1962 provides for forms of Land Tenure in towns, while Proclamation R188/1969 regulates forms of land tenure in rural areas.

The Indigenous Law element of  land tenure has always been preserved in the sense that in rural towns the Land Survey Act and the Deeds Registration Act are expressly as the ethnic characteristics of a town determined the acquisition of land tenure rights.

However, one would not be punished to assume that the aforegoing provision is probably affected or repealed by section 105 of the Abolition of Racially Based Land Measures Act 108/1991, which reads as follows:-

"Any provision in any law of a self-governing territory restricting the acquisition and utilization of rights to land on the ground of race or ethnically shall cease to be in force in such area after commencement of this act."

In rural areas, Proclamation 188 of 1969 makes provision for quitrents and permissions to occupy, the former being a limited real right, which is inheritable although it cannot be disposed of by means of a will. Registrations thereof must take place. This was mostly applicable in areas owned by the defunct South African Development Trust (SADT) which was dissolved in 1992.

Permission to occupy is the statutory form of communal land tenure, providing for unregistered protected use of unsurveyed communal land.

Today there no longer exist self-governing territories, TBVC states, nor SADT. These bodies used to administer land tenure systems of the indigenous tribes -  who is not entrusted with that mammoth task?

It is crucial to note here that although the SADT was abolished, its land regulations have not been repealed. As for the other organs:-

Some land in self-governing territories was transferred to various bodies, e.g. provincial administrations, Minister of Public Works, Minister of Regional and Land Affairs.

As has already been mentioned in the aforegoing remarks: the King in Indigenous Law "holds land of  his ancestors in trust and on behalf of all his subjects". This is genuine African Bantu religion, Law and Custom as entrenched in Section 30 and 211(i) – (iii) of the Constitution. Let us take the former self-governing state of KwaZulu for example:-

When the self-governing stake of KwaZulu disintegrated in the wake of the 1994 national democratic elections, all land that previously vested in the Government of KwaZulu was transferred to and was held in trust by the Ingonyama, as trustee of the Ingonyama Trust on behalf of the members of the tribes and communities and residents in terms of Section 3(a) of the KwaZulu-Natal Ingonyama Trust Act 3 KZ of 1994.

Who is the Ingonyama that the Act refers to?

The Act describes the Ingonyama as "a person referred to in Section 13 of the KwaZulu Amakhosi and Iziphakanyiswa Act 9 of 1990, or a person who acts on behalf of the Ingonyama in terms of Zulu Indigenous Law…"

The Ingonyama may deal with the land in accordance with Zulu Indigenous Law as per Section 4 of the said Act. However, in terms of Section 4A(4) of Act 3 KZ of 1994 all land which prior to the Amendment Act of 1997 vested in the Ingonyama which has not been registered in private ownership shall vest in a local authority if such land is situated in a township.

If such land was, however, state land, used for state purposes before April 1994, such land shall be deemed to vest in the National Government or Provincial Government of Kabuli-Natal in terms of Section 239 of the Interim Constitution of the RSA, Act 200 of 1993.

The Communal Land Rights Bill (CLRB) expressly provides that it will affect land to which the KwaZulu-Natal Ingonyama Trust, Act 3 KZ of 1994.

A brief summary of the points of impact in the grave conflict of Constitutional rights of the indigenous peoples on the one hand, and the laws of Western origin on the other, including the Communal Land Rights Bill:-

• The Preamble of the Bill alleges that systems of land tenure in communal areas have isolated fundamental human rights guaranteed in the Constitution.

• Would the Amakhosi as empowered by Section 211 of the Constitution find joy in this provision?

• These land tenure systems are legally insecure.

• Is Indigenous Law as entrenched in Section 211 not effective enough to protect Indigenous Law rights? What is the role of the Indigenous Law courts, the Ingonyama Trust etc?

• The Bill undertakes to regulate the role of traditional leadership in communal land administration.

• Is the bill going to repeal the KwaZulu Amakhosi and Iziphakanyiswa Act 9 of 1990?

• Is that not going to be a violation of Section 211 of the Constitution and Section 30 of the Constitution, as well?

• The Bill basically seeks to provide for families, households or persons to obtain legally secure tenure on communal land.

What about the entrenched principles of Indigenous Law especially the fact that only the family head deals in property transactions on behalf of his family or agnatic group i.e. a group of households?

What will be the impact of the Bill on Indigenous Law of Succession as prescribed under the Black Administration Act (remember the principle of patriarchal primogeniture or male primogeniture?).

Another point of contention is that there are no individuals in Indigenous Law, which are community based, whereas the Bill seeks to provide for persons. There is also no juristic person in Indigenous Law.

The opinion is held that even the Ingonyama Trust is quasi-juristic. So far the questions and the answers are the same. It would appear that the Constitutional Court has a mammoth task lying ahead.

Top

Wage increases will hurt agriculture - warn farmers

Commercial farmers have warned that increased minimum wages for farm workers will result in further job losses in the sector and weaken South Africa's ability to maintain agricultural output to satisfy both domestic and export demands.

Labour Minister Membathisi Mdladlana announced the increases of between 9 and 10 percent in minimum wages for farm workers are effective from 1 March 2004.

The new increases should be regarded as "a people's contract to create work and fight poverty, because it protects the most vulnerable of workers by setting minimum wages and acceptable working conditions", said a statement from Mdladlana's office.

Farmers' union Agri SA believes the increases will lead to further job losses in the sector, which is already struggling to come to terms with the effects of drought and the rising cost of inputs.

"More job opportunities will be lost, which the country and agriculture cannot afford. Smaller, upcoming farmers really are battling to survive and cannot afford all these minimum wage proscriptions ... they are going to have to lay off labour," said Agri SA president Japie Grobler.

He stressed, however, that "we'll have to abide by the law, we'll have to pay the minimum wages".

Mdladlana acknowledged the impact drought has had on farmers in many areas and indicated that those farmers who were unable to introduce the increases would have to present their cases to the Department of Labour and apply for an exemption. These would be dealt with on a case-by-case basis.

He noted that "there is a level of flexibility within the [minimum wage] determination, so as to ensure conditions are in place that allow for job creation. Examples of this flexibility include the split wage levels, recognising the different economic challenges facing farmers in different parts of the country, and the room given to farmers to apply for variations [from the set minimum wage]".

Mdladlana warned that "the African National Congress government remains committed to the protection of these vulnerable workers, so legislation will be enforced". He added that the level of compliance by farmers to the minimum wage since 2001 had been generally good, with a compliance rate of between 65 and 90 percent.

When the farm worker wage determination was first promulgated in December 2001, minimum wages were set at R800 (about US $120) for workers in those areas of the country where average household income was more than R24,000 (about US $3,600) per annum - categorised as Area A - and at R650 (about US $98) for areas where average household income was less than R24,000 per annum - Area B.

"The annual increment to the minimum wage means that workers on a minimum wage in Area A will receive a 9 percent increase, calculated on an hourly basis, or a R71.58 [about US $11] increase per month, while minimum wage Area B workers will get a 10 percent increase, calculated on an hourly basis, or R63.65 [about US $9] increase for a full month's work)," the labour department said.

Grobler said the wage increases, coupled with the cost of inputs and the impact of drought, were "making it impossible for commercial farmers to make money, and impossible for new emerging farmers, black farmers, to abide by all these rules and regulations".

"We want to be self-sufficient and export food but ... on the one hand we work in a free market environment when it comes to our inputs, and on the other when it comes to your labour you are told what to do," Grobler said.

Top

Namibia's land reform process is being questioned by some who find the pace too slow, while others argue that its benefits are debatable.

The Agricultural (Commercial) Land Reform Act of 1995 provides for the acquisition of agricultural land by the government, for redistribution to Namibians "who do not own, or otherwise have the use of, agricultural land, or adequate agricultural land and, foremost, to those Namibian citizens who have been socially, economically or educationally disadvantaged by past discriminatory laws or practices".

The land reform process in Namibia is based on a "willing-seller, willing-buyer" principle, with the government having first option on any commercial farm for sale.

Only 30,720 people out of an estimated 243,000 landless Namibians were resettled by 2003, and critics have said the country's piecemeal land reform had moved far too slowly since independence in 1990, and delivered far too few tangible benefits to its land-hungry citizens.

The government has countered that its hands were tied, as some of the land offered by the commercial agriculture sector was unsuitable for resettlement.

Authorities have launched a Land Tribunal to "determine the purchase price in instances where there is a dispute between the owner of commercial agricultural land and the Ministry of Lands, Resettlement and Rehabilitation, once that land has been offered for sale to the government," the ministry said in a statement.

Researchers have suggested that many beneficiaries were unable to sustain themselves on their allocated land, which has led to calls on government to provide more long-term support to new small-scale farmers.

Just 15 farms, a total of 6,483 hectares, were acquired for resettlement in 2001/02. Figures for 2003/04 are not yet available, but by late 2003 the government had acquired just 124 farms, totalling more than 700,000 hectares, since land reform began in 1995, well below the target of 9.5 million hectares in five years.

Pressure has mounted for more radical measures, with newspaper headlines drawing comparisons to Zimbabwe's controversial fast-track programme. In recent months Namibia's farmworkers' union threatened to invade commercial farms in what they dubbed "land-sharing and not land grabbing". The union said the move was prompted by the eviction of farmworkers from farms across the country.

In a statement condemning the planned land invasions, the Lands and Resettlement Minister, Hifikepunye Pohamba, acknowledged that the "pace of acquiring land meant for resettling formerly disadvantaged landless Namibians is not moving fast".

He said this was because "some farmland offered to the government [was] totally unsuitable for resettlement purposes. Some of these farms offered are very stony and desert-like areas. Therefore, the ministry cannot buy these unproductive farms and put people on them".

Pohamba noted that land was a sensitive issue in Namibia and the entire southern African region, and had to be handled "with the utmost care". Upon launching the Land Tribunal, he said the land question in Namibia was both crucial and complicated, "in that it is the most important and primary means of production, because every development activity takes place on land".

His ministry was about to complete a database of all beneficiaries resettled over the years, their dependants and livestock.

In its "Vision 2030" statement, the ministry said the annual average resettlement rate was 2,222 people, and it was hoping to resettle between 68,000 and 70,000 by 2030. An amount of N $50 million (US $6.5 million) has been set aside over the next five years for the purchase of farms.

It admitted that the "acquisition of land and the subsequent process of land distribution and access, through resettlement and rehabilitation programmes, have so far proved to be a hard nut to crack. Its complexity stems from various inherent factors, such as land availability in relation to the skyrocketing demand for it".

The ministry is now questioning whether the current mode of land reform is the best one for the country. In an overview of its work, the ministry asked: "Does resettlement and rehabilitation (as part of land reform) contribute positively to the overall goals for national development, and if so, how much?"

Analysts have pointed to a lack of post-resettlement support as a major stumbling block to successful implementation of land reform policy.

A report by Namibia's Legal Assistance Centre (LAC), 'One Day We Will Be Equal ... A socio-legal perspective on Namibian Land Reform and Resettlement Process', said "the only reason that rampant starvation and malnutrition do not ravage the resettlement projects is because the government operates a food-for-work programme in virtually every resettlement project".

"Beneficiaries of resettlement projects are caught in a vicious [cycle] because of their poverty: they have to sell agricultural produce to obtain some cash, which in turn lands them in a food deficit situation."

It added that "one of the main criticisms against the resettlement programme has been that it does not provide sufficient training on how to effectively utilise land obtained from the government, nor does it provide access to modern farm equipment".

LAC researcher Willem Odendaal, who co-authored the report, told IRIN that "there's a definite lack of capacity building programmes". There was "a lack of transferring skills, basic technical skills and basic managerial skills to the beneficiaries on these projects".

"Another problem is that people are not close to markets. Also, if they are lucky to produce some produce for the markets, they don't have the means, the organisational or managerial skills, to organise themselves," he explained.

"It's very difficult for people to have access to credit to make improvements on the piece of land they are allocated, as there's definite insecurity in terms of the transfer of ownership of title deeds," Odendaal said. Many beneficiaries of land reform were unable to secure loans because they had a long-term lease agreement with the state, and not title to the land.

The ministry has argued that "long-term lease agreements with the incumbent beneficiaries ... give new impetus to the resettlement programme in general, and will raise revenue to secure the long-term sustainability of the programme".

"Lease agreements will encourage beneficiaries to increase the productivity of their respective plots and add value to the resettlement programme," the ministry said.

However, the research conducted by LAC indicated that "lending institutions, inherently conservative in nature, are not likely to lend money based on collateral of uncertain legal title, although (in theory) a loan might be given on a properly registered 99-year lease which had some marketable value".

But there "is no substitute for clear and unambiguous legal rights to land [which was] absolutely necessary for [new] settlers to compete in a modern agricultural economy", the report added.

"If your property is not registered, then it has complications - in the sense that you cannot get a loan to improve your land, you cannot put land up as surety to improve the land and buy basic equipment," Odendaal said.

"Thus, the reality of life in the resettlement projects is of settlers being dumped on a few hectares of poor land, equipped with hoes and shovels, and expected to earn a living. This is a process certain to fail - a viable resettlement programme requires an infrastructure to support settlers while they gain access to the kind of substantial agricultural enterprises that can support a reasonable lifestyle," the report concluded.

With all this in mind, many resettled beneficiaries have opted to lease their plots, mostly to communal farmers from overgrazed areas, for as much as N $200 (US $30) a month. Some, said Odendaal, had opted to abandon their plots for a chance at a better life in urban areas.

A newly created Permanent Technical Team (PTT) on Land Reform will undertake a survey of 40 percent of the 124 farms acquired by government that are earmarked for resettlement, to "establish the socio-economic profiles of the resettled people or beneficiaries", and review the existing policy and legal framework dealing with land reform and natural resources management.

The PTT hopes to develop "a comprehensive Land Reform Plan of Action". Pohamba has said this "Action Plan would then map out the future direction of land reform in Namibia".

Germany, the country's former colonial power, announced last year that US $7.8 million of a recent development aid package of US $25.66 million would go towards the country's land reform programme and to finance the PTT.

The LAC study argued that "the land reform and resettlement process must be carefully evaluated as a poverty-amelioration measure".

"Simply put, the future of small-scale agriculture in Namibia, as well as in the rest of rural Southern Africa, may be economically very limited. Therefore, resettling 100,000 or more Namibians on small-scale agricultural schemes may never be an effective way to reduce rural poverty," the report concluded.

The country is currently in the grip of a food security crisis, with some 650,000 people in a population of around 1.8 million said to need food aid this year.

A combination of ongoing drought and flash floods has severely eroded the coping ability of rural dwellers and subsistence farmers.

According to Odendaal, "in Namibia there's a history of how commercial farmers were supported with subsidies in the old apartheid days ... and in the dry season their subsidies just increased".

"It's very difficult to farm in Namibia, and I think government has been under-estimating climate conditions in this country," he noted. "People need to be able to sustain themselves, and [more than] 10 years into the resettlement programme, they have not been able to do so."

Top

Namibia's land reform programme has not addressed the crucial issue of security of tenure for farmworkers.

Secretary-general of the National Farmworkers Union (NFU), Alfred Angula, said the drafters of the Agricultural (Commercial) Land Reform Act missed an opportunity to enshrine security of tenure for farmworkers. Since the legislation was enacted in 1995, "nothing has changed" in terms of farmworkers' rights to live on land they had worked, sometimes for decades.

In the past few months 15 families have been evicted from farms where they lived and worked, an issue that has sparked debate in a country where racially skewed land ownership remains a sensitive topic.

Agricultural Employers Association (AEA) chairman Hellmut Fortsch told IRIN that imposing security of tenure - as was done in neighbouring South Africa - would lead to greater unemployment and make farming more difficult in the drought-prone country.

The NFU has taken some of these cases to court, but is finding it difficult. A lack of funding is one reason. "It has become more difficult for us to fight because you need a huge amount of money to challenge that in court, and we depend on the monthly [membership] subscriptions of workers. To fight evictions you have to go to the higher courts, and the lawyers are expensive," Angula said.

"Also, how do you fight it? Because there's no legal provision for security of tenure [for farmworkers]. There also might be numerous cases which we do not know of - the cases we have are only those where our members are affected," he added.

The government announced in mid-February that the cabinet had approved the introduction of a Temporary Intervention Policy of Eviction.

The Namibian newspaper reported that the policy would be aimed at farm labourers and their dependents, and would take into account their length of service on a farm. "Depending on these and other considerations, the policy should prohibit outright evictions in no uncertain terms," Information Minister Nangolo Mbumba was quoted as saying.

Last year Labour Minister Marco Hausiku set up a commission of inquiry to investigate recent evictions, but it failed to get off the ground because of a lack of funding.

Fortsch said the AEA had as yet received no communication on the new policy and it was too early for a new policy to be formulated on farmworker evictions, as negotiations among stakeholders were ongoing.

"Like any other industry, an employee who loses his job by way of disciplinary action or retrenchment, or whatever, has to leave his housing. The same happens to be true for any government institution - many teachers are living in peripheral villages in housing provided by government; the same is true with police officials. I don't think government can force anything on the agricultural sector, as far as providing housing after pensioning [off a worker], for instance," Fortsch said.

"You cannot have a situation where you do not employ someone, yet they are still staying on your land," he added.

"The South African way of [ensuring] tenure rights, which is eight years in operation, is not seen as a good example of how to do it yet. One recommendation from [a commission looking into the issue] is based on the South African concept: if you've been working for 10 years for an employer then you get tenure rights. I've seen [reports that said] up to 300,000 employees in the agricultural sector have lost jobs because of that obligation on the employer [to provide security of tenure]," Fortsch said.

"What South African employers [presumably] have done is [applied a] forced retrenchment process, and outsourced many labour intensive functions [on their farms], keeping only core employees who they could afford to offer tenure rights," Fortsch explained.

A similar move by Namibian employers could negatively impact on the poverty alleviation goals of the government - over 30 percent of the population is unemployed. "So we will go into these negotiations [with government and unions] and point out that we cannot afford to lose any jobs", said Fortsch.

Land reform is inextricably linked to politics in Namibia. The country will hold elections this year, and the land reform question is back on the agenda.

The new interim policy on evictions was "probably the only real effort made by the ministry, so far, to look at aspects of farmworkers' tenure rights", said Legal Assistance Centre researcher Willem Odendaal.

"The [Agricultural Land Reform] Act did not really make mention of the rights of farmworkers, and this is an issue that has some serious implications for land reform - it can easily be used as a political weapon to cause a lot of havoc in the country," he said.

"This leaves us in a very difficult situation," said Fortsch, "with negotiations ongoing, we might come up with a solution. This is also a year of elections in Namibia, and anybody who has any political ambitions is trying to jump on the wagon, [making] demands."

Angula told IRIN a draft amendment to the Agricultural Reform Act was being finalised. "I have seen the draft, and security of tenure is mentioned, but we have a problem with some of the language," he said.

"In terms of having a peaceful country and crime free, one learns from your neighbours. What happened in Zimbabwe - the land-grab and those problems - if we want to be proactive, there are some measures we can take to avoid those problems. But if you're adamant, you might invite those kinds of problems. It's better to put programmes in place that suit both parties in terms of benefits with regards to land reform. The 'willing-buyer, willing-seller' [policy] is not going to work, as government does not have the money to purchase and resettle people and fulfil their needs, and the whole process is slow and frustrating to people who want land," Angula warned.

"People working on farms for long periods of time, who get dismissed or retrenched - what do you do with these people in the absence of tenure rights?" he asked.

Angula said the NFU's demands were simple: "Security of tenure for farmworkers now. They should also be allowed to work the land they live on for their own benefit. Otherwise, how will they sustain themselves if a farmer says he has no work for them? Because there's presently a lack of retirement funds and social-safety nets if you lose your job."

Organised agriculture believe they might have a solution. "For the long term we are looking at establishing a pension fund for farmworkers, so they then can take a third [of the funds upon retirement] to buy some housing scheme, and the other two-thirds will buy them a pension," Fortsch explained.

"The fund is special, in the sense that employees will be able to take out a home loan against the fund," a Namibian Agricultural Union statement said.

Final approval for the fund is anticipated at an AEA congress on 24 June this year.

The Permanent Technical Team currently reviewing the land reform process in Namibia is expected to have its report out by June this year.

Top

Namibia's labour federation has called for farms with poor labour relations to be targeted for expropriation.

Welcoming the government's announcement this week that it intended expropriating land to accelerate the land reform process, the National Union of Namibian Workers (NUNW) said on Friday that the land issue "continues to be a source of social tensions". Peter Naholo, NUNW's acting general secretary, urged the government to include retrenched farm workers among the beneficiaries of the land resettlement policy, and to incorporate tenure rights for farm workers in the new Labour Amendment Bill.

"Stop the widespread retrenchments of farm workers and other workers by introducing a permanent mechanism of approval for retrenchments. Employers who want to retrench should be forced to prove that they have exhausted all other options before embarking on retrenchments," said Naholo.

NUNW has also called for heavy levies to be imposed on farm owners using productive agricultural land for game farming and lodges. The labour federation called on the government to introduce training programmes for resettled small-scale farmers to enable them to put the land to good use.

Prime Minister Theo-Ben Gurirab announced the new expropriation policy on state television and radio, but assured the country that acquisition would take place in "accordance with the Namibian constitution and the relevant legislation".

He also underlined that the government was not doing away with the "willing buyer, willing seller" approach, but the new policy, contained in an amendment to the existing Agricultural (Commercial) Land Reform Act passed last year, would allow expropriation against "just payment".

The main farmers' body, the Namibia Agricultural Union, has reacted cautiously to the announcement.

Top

Rwandan militias have been accused of killing a dozen farmers in Walungu, 25 km southwest of Bukavu, capital of South Kivu Province in eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Mayi-Mayi militiamen in the region told IRIN on Friday.

Congolese National Radio and Television, RTNC, issued a similar report, citing 15 victims.

"Interahamwe [Rwandan Hutu militants] attacked farmers and killed those who refused to surrender their cows," Gilbert Muke, a leader of the local Mayi-Mayi - now calling themselves "Action pour la defense de la Republique" - stated.

"I saw the corpses of eight men and two women left behind by the attackers, who fled eastward towards Kanyola when they heard that we were coming," Muke said.

Mayi-Mayi, traditional Congolese militias, are one of several former belligerent parties now represented in the DRC's two-year transitional national government.

The UN Mission in the DRC (MONUC) said it had been informed of the killings, but could not confirm anything until an inquiry team that had been sent completed its mission.

"The murders are alleged to have taken place last week, according to the reports we received," Eliane Nabaa, MONUC information officer in Bukavu, told IRIN.

Top