Namibian Govt Official’s Dishonest Speech about Land Reform

Original Post Date: 2004-05-13 Time: 13:44:09  Posted By: Jan

[Note in this speech by a Namibian Minister, how they address each other as “Comrade” – which is a common term also used in Zimbabwe and which reflects on the communist training of these “Liberation Movements”.

Note too the many similar arguments used by this Minister, which were used to justify the Zimbabwe Land Grab… for example… they want the Landless to also get a chance to farm – which experience shows doesn’t happen and that is why Zimbabwe is now dying of hunger.

Look at all the high-minded sounding claptrap being put forth as the justification for why this land reform is now needed. Yes, the poor blacks are being maltreated by the farmers… yeah… that’s why we must now steal the white farmers’ land. As if that is in itself a valid, reasonable or even vaguely logical REASON for stealing farmland from the whites. If the farmers are maltreating the black workers (if that is in fact happening)… wouldn’t a simple and reasonable solution really be to prosecute them and deal with them via labour laws? Is it NECESSARY to STEAL THEIR LAND?

Look critically at this speech, and look at the many completely BOGUS REASONS are given for “why it is necessary now” to steal the land of the white farmers. Its all a load of complete crap.

Here’s another bogus argument… the black farm workers are still poor after 14 years of independence so now we need to give them their own land. Well… you moron… giving them their own land will make them even poorer and they may even die from lack of food. Remember: Namibia is largely a DESERT. So if blacks can’t farm in Zimbabwe where the rainfall is many times better than in South Africa or Namibia… then how will they survive in Namibia? But these bloody lying bastards need to now spew forth all this high-minded-super-moralistic liberal-sounding clap trap which many people, especially foreigners, will believe… and then they’ll start STEALING the well run farm land and driving the whites out…

The Minister tells this lie, which we have heard in Zimbabwe, and will yet hear a thousand times in South Africa: “It is the view of our government that acquisition of land is a crucial element in the entire spectrum of poverty alleviation measures…”. Bull. It won’t alleviate poverty. It will make it worse.

Note in the statement issued by the President of the Namibian Agricultural Union, the farms already targetted are not unused or foreign owned farms as the Government had promised. So, the deception and lies are evident right at the outset…

Rest assured, if Government officials have to make “counter offers” for farmland… that the white farmers will progressively be cheated more and more… until later on the farmers get nothing…

Thanks to Georg in Nambia for this information. Jan]

The following statement was made by Minister Pohamba. The statement is published verbatim and the reaction of the NAU follows directly after it.

Comrade Deputy Speaker Honorable Members,

After the address by the Right Honorable Prime Minister, Comrade Theo Ben Gurirab on the evening of 25 February 2004, I would like to confirm my Ministry’s adequate preparedness to implement the expropriation option for acquiring commercial agricultural land.

Members of this august House will recall that, from 24 June to 1 July 1991, the SWAPO Party Government convened a Land Conference that was meant to be a consultative process. This historic Conference gave birth to the renowned Agricultural (Commercial) Land Reform Act, Act 6 of 1995.

The Conference noted that much of Namibia’s prime farming land was expropriated by the German and South African colonial regimes and then allocated to white settlers exclusively. The Conference correctly concluded that something practicable must be done in order to redress this injustice. With regard to absentee landlords, the Conference “resolved that land owned by absentees should be expropriated” especially where such an owner is not a Namibian. The Conference also noted that, I quote, “Some commercial farmers own more than one farm or large tracts of land while many Namibian farmers lack sufficient land to make an adequate living” and that, “redistribution of such farms will open up access to a greater number of Namibian farmers”. The Conference resolved “that very large farms and ownership of several farms by one owner should not be permitted and such land should be expropriated” to benefit the landless majority.

Regarding farm workers, the Land Conference was very clear about the need to address the exploitation of those who work on the land, toil on a daily basis and at the end of the day receive a meagre portion of its proceeds. Evidence shows that, almost 14 years after independence, many of the farm workers live and work in deplorable conditions with very poor housing and virtually no access to social services and when their usefulness has come to a miserable end, they are dumped along the roads like useless scrap, with no human feelings whatsoever.

The injustices perpetuated on farm workers by some

farmers are condemned in the strongest terms and cannot be accepted in an independent Namibia. The nation has, in the past, witnessed the inhuman treatment of farm workers by some commercial farmers, and we believe it is the duty of the Government to put in place mechanisms aimed at protecting the citizens of this country. In this regard, the Land Conference resolved that, I quote “Farm workers should be afforded the right to reside on the farm after retirement.” The Government considered the resolutions of the Conference and proceeded to enact various pieces of legislation aimed at improving the well being of the workers. The Agricultural (Commercial) Land Reform Act, Act 6 of 1995, provides for acquisition of land through the willing seller, willing buyer approach and expropriation of land for agricultural purposes in the public interest.

Comrade Deputy Speaker,

My Ministry has been working tirelessly to prepare the modalities of implementing these provisions. I can say, with confidence, that my Ministry has put all the logistical requirements for the full implementation of the provisions of the Act, including expropriation. The necessary legal requirements are in place and the human and financial resources have been acquired in order to support the implementation of the expropriation option of the Act. The Act provides that the Minister may “acquire, in the public interest, in accordance with the provisions of the Act, agricultural land in order to make such land available for agricultural purposes”. It is the view of our government that acquisition of land is a crucial element in the entire spectrum of poverty alleviation measures, because the one who possesses and owns land has the key to the means to acquire wealth. In this perspective, the acquisition of land is viewed to be in the public interest, as it is meant to empower the majority of our people and uplift their well being, through access to the central factor of production – the land.

Honorable Members,

I would not like to dwell on the academic side of the definition of public interest, but would like to indicate that academic debates on this issue may be thought-provoking but will not resolve the problems facing this nation on the issue of land. The government advocates economic empowerment to alleviate poverty and that should include the majority of our people who were disadvantaged by the previous discriminatory laws or practices.

Comrade Deputy Speaker,

I know that, after the address of the Right Honorable Prime Minister, the nation, and most probably people outside Namibia, would like to know how expropriation is going to be implemented and, in particular, how “just compensation”, enshrined in the Namibian Constitution is going to be determined. In a nutshell, the process shall be triggered by a notice of expropriation served upon the owner of the agricultural land. On receipt of the expropriation notice, the owner will be required to prepare and submit a claim for compensation to the Ministry of Lands, Resettlement and Rehabilitation who, in this case, is the acquiring authority. The effect of the expropriation notice is that the owner is not supposed to make any new improvements on the property except the maintenance of the existing infrastructure to good working condition while still in possession of the property.

The expropriation notice will be followed by an inspection and valuation of the property and a counter-offer to the owner’s claim for compensation, should the Minister deem the owner’s claim for compensation to be excessive. Where land is expropriated, compensation to the owner shall be based, primarily, upon the market value of the land. In this regard, the market value will be determined as the amount that would have been paid for the land if it has been sold on the date of expropriation in the open market by a willing seller to a willing buyer. In determining the open market value, no account will be taken of any anticipated or

actual use to which the acquiring authority will put the land and any increase or decrease of value of land as a result of development in respect of which the expropriation is being done.

In other words, the property is valued on its current use as of the date of expropriation. In addition to the open market value, due consideration shall be given to any other loss that may have been incurred as a result of the action of the acquiring authority.

Honorable Members,

Where a lease exists and the owner of the expropriated land proves that such lease is still in force, compensation shall be paid for the remaining terms of such lease. In other words, the owner’s cost of premature termination of the lease will be paid by the expropriating authority in order to terminate such lease.

The Act provides that, for the purpose of compensation, the expropriation authority will not take into account the enhancement in value as a result of an unlawful use of the property or improvements made after the date of notice except where such improvements were necessary for the proper maintenance of existing improvements.

Comrade Deputy Speaker,

I have the pleasure to draw to the attention of this august House, Article 18 of the Namibian Constitution, and I quote: “Administrative bodies and administrative officials must act fairly and reasonably and comply with the requirements imposed upon such bodies and officials by common law and any relevant legislation, and persons aggrieved by the exercise of such acts and decisions shall have the right to seek redress before a competent Court of Tribunal.” Section 27 of the Agricultural (Commercial) Land Reform Act gives the parties an opportunity to apply to the Lands Tribunal for the determination of compensation. The determination of compensation by the Lands Tribunal does not go without costs that shall be awarded against the party who loses the case. This may be the Minister or the owner of such expropriated land or the holder of a lease or any other right in the expropriated property. The magnitude of such costs shall be determined by the Lands Tribunal.

As indicated by the Right Honorable Prime Minister in his address to the nation, the Ministry of Lands, Resettlement and Rehabilitation has since 1995 been allocated twenty million Namibian dollars to purchase land on an annual basis, which amount has now been increased to fifty million Namibian dollars. This money will be used to acquire farms through expropriation and/or through the willing-seller willing-buyer process. The Ministry has adequate funds to kick-start the process and will proceed with this option without further delay as those who should have benefited from land reform are becoming impatient since the principle of willing-seller willing-buyer failed to deliver the required results. The identification of farms will be in those areas where no offers are forthcoming and where specific land reform programs have been planned. The Ministry will proceed to acquire property through expropriation only after due consultation with the Land Reform Advisory Commission. The Commission, which is composed of all stakeholders, was established in accordance with section 4 of the Agricultural (Commercial) Land Reform Act, in order to assist the Minister in administering the Act.

Comrade Deputy Speaker, Honorable Members,

I have no doubt that the citizens of this great country see justice in the full implementation of this law and will rally behind the Government in its land reform program. I further take this opportunity to inform this august House that expropriation notices will soon be served to the owners of commercial farms that are targeted to kick-start this process.

Comrade Deputy Speaker,

It is clear that the Government may not resettle everyone, but the Government is committed to resettle those who need the land and make a meaningful contribution to the growth of the agricultural sector. The Ministry of Lands, Resettlement and Rehabilitation has, during the past two years, accelerated its efforts to secure agricultural finance to support the resettlement program. It is, however, reassuring to note that the Agricultural Bank of Namibia has agreed, in principle, to advance loans to the beneficiaries of resettlement. It is my wish that other financial institutions consider following the example of AgriBank of Namibia. The availability of finance and the prudent selection of beneficiaries of the resettlement program will ensure that the accelerated land acquisition process will not disrupt the agricultural sector.

[Here is the weak reaction of the white-dominated Namibian Agricultural Union to the above statement. Of course, they are powerless and have accepted their fate. But in reality, one needs to make the International community aware of the Namibian Government’s deception. Jan]

NAU reacts

In reaction to the Right Honorable Prime Minister’s announcement on the expropriation of commercial farms, the NAU requests its members not to over-react and urge all stakeholders to address the issue with wisdom, calmness and responsibility.

Throughout the whole process of land reform and possible expropriation, the NAU and its members were under the impression that, if expropriation should take place, it would be on criteria such as the productive use of land and land not economically utilised by foreigners.

However, the announcement of the names of the eight farms as published in “Namibia Today” of February 27, 2004 came as a shock to the Namibian farmers, the business world and international community. It seems as though the names as listed and published in the mouthpiece of the governing party do not reflect the criteria as internationally perceived, but is interpreted as a retaliatory measure. The NAU, as a responsible mouthpiece of the commercial farming sector, requests its members and the international world to be calm for the sake of stability in the country. It is now equally important that the government clearly indicates to the international world what criteria have been used in the identification of the farms to be expropriated and sets the disturbed minds at ease.

In the present circumstances of uncertainty and confusion, the NAU has also formally requested the Right Honorable Prime Minister to fully inform the nation regarding all the aspects of the intended expropriation program and more specifically, on the criteria to be used for the identification of farms to be expropriated.

JAN DE WET,

President NAU

NAU tables constructive plan to address land issue

A Special Executive Council meeting of representatives of all regions of Namibia has after extensive discussions decided unanimously on the following document which is a summary of discussions and decisions –

1. WHAT IS THE REACTION OF OUR FARMERS (149)•

anxiety

insecurity about their existence, right of possession, criteria

desperation / helplessness / resignation

discontinuation of development

loss of income out of agri-tourism/loss of foreign exchange

labor unrest

reduction of labor

looking for someone to blame

looking for new leader and/or organization to come to the rescue

threaten to take the law into own hands

POSITIVE:

i. farmers realise that expropriation is a reality;

ii. farmers accept the challenge to manage this process to be

sustainable

International reaction

(149)• fear that it might result in a Zimbabwe situation

(149)• possibility of no investment and assistance

(149)• drastic reduction in tourism

2. WHAT MUST BE DONE

obtain and distribute the correct information

accept realities

get involved again

promote an attitude of reconciliation

look for partners –

i. internal in the NAU;

ii. local organizations (financial institutions, businesses);

iii. government;

iv. internationally (embassies, outside organizations);

v. churches CCN;

vi. NNFU (black radical farmers union)

communicate continuously with government regarding

– the status of the PTT’s recommendations as government’s land reform plan

– checking status/grey areas (mainly criteria for expropriation)

– recommendations of the NAU land reform document –

– making short-term actions part of the long-term solutions

– status of 1991 land conference decision

– acknowledgement of AA farm purchases as part of the resettlement program

– including farm “waivers” received of statistics regarding land reform areas where no farms were offered

– the role of the LRAC

– a stronger and clearer NAU viewpoint

– differentiate between land reform and labor matters

do something ourselves

– how do we handle labour matters ourselves

– procedures regarding labour matters

– phone office or AEA management for assistance and advice

– try to settle labor disputes without going to court

– EC/regional representatives must become more involved in the distribution of information prevent disintregation into small, unimportant groups prevent challenging government assist new farmers

3. HOW MUST THIS BE DONE

found own fund to support NAU members to protect their interests

feedback

4. WHO MUST DO THIS

The president of the NAU and the management committee

xxxxx Sign Up