Draft Report

Landgrab in North-Kivu Province of D R Congo: The real situation and its consequences on small-scale farmer.

DRAFT REPORT

Simplex Kambale Malembe

Goma, Democratic Republic of Congo

May 2011.

1 | P a g e

REPORT OF THE STUDY ON LANDGRABBING AND ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR SMALL-SCALE FARMERS IN THE NORTH-KIVU PROVINCE.

WORK PLAN AND TABLE OF CONTENTS:

0. Word from the consultant. I. General Introduction. II. Presentation of the North Kivu province. 1. Administrative presentation. 2. Presentation of the land administration plan. III. As concerns the occupation of rural land in North Kivu. 1. List of plantations in North Kivu. 2. List of farms in Nord Kivu. 3. Some comments. IV. Farms and plantations having belonged to CNKI blocks. V. Problem of parcs and reserves in North Kivu province. VI. Big land negotiations in the last ten years. VII. Summary of motivations of actors behind the land grabbing. VIII. Land law in DRC and its implications on farm land in North Kivu province. 1. The position of the two land management systemse. 2. The law on fundamental principles of agriculturep. 3. Law relating to relationship between customary chiefs and agricultural producers in North Kivuu. 4. Characterisitics of land system in force. 5. Developping practices and customs. 6. Patial Conclusion. IX. Initiatives at the regional, national and international level. X. Some cases of farmer struggle which could serve as examples. XI. Some reccomendations and strategiy elements to various leaders of EAFF. XII.Some business models for the farmer organizations and other actors.

List of abbreviations.

2 | P a g e

0. WORD FROM THE CONSULTANT:

The report comes after several months of contract signing, which was practically achieved in October 2010. This delay is due mainly to several facts; the time taken for the tryearsfer of the funds for work came a little later, basically at the beginning of 2011, when the consultant had already taken other engagements with other partners in the first quarter of the year. Then, continuing insecurity in some parts of the province resulted in, the repeated postponement of the task of collecting reliable data. At the stage of producing this report, we sincerely thank the leaders of EAFF for the trust and confidence they have had in us and above all the patience they have shown in the production of this report. The province of North Kivu is not only large (larger than RWANDA and BURUNDI put together). This also reflects not only the difficropies in covering this large area but also and above all the different realities in the region. We also thank all our investigators/researchers deployed on ground, where, for reasons of strategy, the consultant could not make to due to security factors. Their courage and determination were great lessons of patriotism and selflessness for us. Our special thanks go to Mr. PALUKU MIVIMBA, the president of the FOPAC and member of the Board of Directors of EAFF, who has given us moral support, sometimes in difficrop times that almost discouraged us. It would be ungrateful to ignore the work and the availability of tribal chiefs, heads of different departments (land titles, land registry, mining services…). We remain grateful for the qualities of information given to us despite the difficrop context in which many of them work in. They are real fighters. The farmer declarations and availability are evidence that the phenomenon of land grabbing is a reality in North Kivu province despite attempts of falsification/trickery by other actors. We truly appreciated, any information they have given us throughout our investigations. Finally, for the logistics service that the "FAT / Great Lakes" Forum des Amis de la Terre Forum of Friends of Land, we can only thank all the leaders of this organization, the CEO who has edited this report.

This work is a first in its essence and its ambitions on the issue in North Kivu province. As such it must have imperfections that would take of some value to many readers. We are aware of this. Indeed, census work, for identification and production of a strategy proposal for reclaiming land rights is not an easy task. We must also bring into fore the contextual, security and administrative difficropy which was an obstacle in accessing all the data that would have enabled us to respond to the expectations of all. It was a must for us to dare. This is what is important. It is here then that we must also thank the leaders of EAFF for having dared and sustained the initiative. The land issue is one of the most sensitive issues in the province of North Kivu. We lived this reality during our investigations with statements et and sometimes reservations and resistances we met from our respondents. This investigation opens a new field of research action for practitioners and scientists from all sides. It therefore suffers the fate of pioneer. The innocent martyr. Martyr due to its imperfection, but also a martyr by what it dared, daring to tackle a theme which many

3 | P a g e actors/players would have rather left it silent in the context of the province of North Kivu. We also recognize this. This draft will go through the process of developing into a final report as agreed in the contract of service and as such, it is likely to undergo amendments according to the observations of one or the other starting with the sponsors, that is, EAFF, the main actors involved, that is the smallscale producers and other actors contacted like traditional leaders, heads of services/departments and largescale farmers contacted. .

SIMPLEX KAMBALE MALEMBE

CONSULTANT.

I. GENERAL INTRODUCTION.

It is in executing the service contract signed between the consultant on the one hand and the Farmers' Federation EAFF, that a study on land grabbing and its implications for smallscale farmers in the province of North Kivu was conducted. This study, done in several phases eventually spread over 5 of the 6 territories of North Kivu province; for security reasons, we could not access the territory of WALIKALE. The major concern of EAFF, in sponsoring this study can be summarized as follows:
To have as much as possible detailed information that will enable it to position itself well as regards the phenomenon of massive land acquisition in NorthKivu province.
To highlight/identify elements for advocacy at the national, regional and international level that favour the smallscale producer in NorthKivu province in order to safeguard his rights against land grabbing. So, it was for the consultant and his team to collect information around the following points:
Identify literature on land grab in the region.
Analyze the legal framework (land law) and lthe local practices on land management in relation to their implication on the smallscale producer.
Analyze the motivations of the authors of land grabbing and identify cases that have already taken place and those that are ongoing.

4 | P a g e

Highlight the implications of this phenomenon of land grabbing on the smallscale producer.
Identify attempts and forms of « resistance » or actions undertaken by the smallscale producers to defend and protect their rights as concerns this phenomenon.
To give recommendations and strategies to be implemented by EAFF in order to protect the rights of small producers in the province. The study took place for a period of three months and had the following main steps:
The collection and exploitation of necessary documentation.
Training of investigators/researchers on the field work.
Field work: this was done twice. The first time, in the month of December 2010 and the second time in march 2011. The field work was coordinated by the consultant who supervised the investigators (Beni, Lubero and Rutshuru territories).
Data compilation and comparison with the different documents available to us.
Preparation of the first draft of the report.

The report comprises three main parts except the introduction and conclusion. These are:

1. Presentation of the NorthKivu province. 2. Issues related to the land grabbing. 3. The sutuation of the land grabbing phenomenon. 4. Some explanation of the phenomenon. 5. Recommendations and possible farmer strategies for the protection and defense of the smalescale producers’ interests. 6. The difficropies/challenges encountered and strategies to overcome them.

II. PRESENTATION OF THE NORTH KIVU PROVINCE.

A. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATION.

1.1. Area: 59631 Km2. 1.2. Administrative subdivision: 6 territories, 3 towns, 10 urban communes, 17 chiefdoms, 97 groupings, 52 quartiers and 5 cities. Towns: Goma, Butembo and Beni. Territories: Beni, Lubero, Rutshuru, Masisi, Walikale and Nyiragongo. 1.3. Population estimate: 7.600.000 people as of 2010. 1.4. Density: about 130 inhabitants per Km2. 1.5. Density of arable land: more than 300 inhabitants per Km2. 1.6.Limits : North: Western Province. South: South Kivu Province. West: Rwanda and Uganda. West: Maniema Province. The following tables give details on administrative subdivisions: sources: North Kivu Monographe.

5 | P a g e

Table n° 1 . Goma town: Headquaters of the province.

Communes. Area. (Km2) Population density. Locality. GOMA 33,45 2.860,6 1. Katindo 2. Keshero 3. Volcan 4. Mikeno 5. Lac Vert 6. Mont Goma. KARISIMBI 42,27 2.203 1. Kahembe 2. Katoyi 3. Majengo 4. Mabanga 5. Murara 6. Ndosho 7. Mugunga

Table n° 2 : Butembo town :

Communes. Area. (Km2) Density Locality BULENGERA 55,18 1. Mutiri 2. Kimbulu 3. Mukuna 4. Kamesi Mgoodzo 5. Rughenda 6. Kyaghala 7. Wayene 8. Kalemire KIMEMI 42,25 1. Commercial 2. Biondi 3. Lumumba 4. Bwinyole 5. Vutetse. 6. Ngengere. 7. Vutsundo 8. Malende

MUSUSA 40,3 1. Vungi 2. Kitulu 3. Matanda 4. Katwa. 5. Bwiningo. 6. Ngingi. 7. Vghole. VULAMBA 52,61 1. Kambali 2. Matembe 3. Mukalangira 4. Congo ya Sika.

6 | P a g e

Table n° 3: Beni town.

COMMUNES AREA (Km2) Population Density Locality BUNGULU 13,5 N.R RWENZORI 14 N.R BEU 15 N.R MULEKERA 13 N.R TOTAL 55 82 The total population of Beni is estimated to be 450000 people. Table n° 4. Territories, towns and communities.

TERRITORIES Area in Km2 TOWNS AND Area in Km2 COLLECTIVITES BENI 7484 1. Oicha town 1. 93 2. Col. Bashu 2. 1.754 3. Col. BeniMbau 3. 2.589 4. Col. Rwenzori 4. 2.496. 5. Col. Watalinga 5. 610. LUBERO 18.096 1. Cité de Kirumba. 1. 5 2. Cité de Kayna 2. 8 3. Cité de Kanyabayonga 3. 9 4. Col. de Baswagha 4. 3.640 5. Col. de Bapere 5. 8.872 6. Col. de Bamate. 6. 1.776 7. Col. de Batangi. 7. 3.786 RUTSHURU 5.289 1. Cité de Kiwandja. 1. 30 2. Col. de Bwisha 2. 2.709. 3. Col. de Bwito 3. 2.550 MASISI 4.744 1. Col. de Bahunde 1. 1.455 2. Col. de Bashali 2. 1.510 3. Col. de Osso. 3. 1.449 4. Col. de Katoyi. 4. 330 WALIKALE 23.475 1. Col. de Bakano 1. 4.238 2. Col. de Wanianga 2. 19.237 NYIRAGONGO 333 1. Col. de Bakumu 1. 333

SOURCE: Preparatory work for the national consultation workshop on rural and agricropural development in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Terms of Reference for North Kivu province.

NYIRAGONGO is the smallest territory with an area of 333 Km2 which is 0,27% of the total area of the province. WALIKALE is the largest territory with an area of 23.475 Km2 being 39,46 % of the total area of the province. Even if we did not access recent data, the available documentation shows that the smallest density in the province is in Bapere in Lubero territory followed by Wanianga in Walikale territory. Table n° 5 : distribution of land per territory.

N° Territory Total Area of % No of Mean area 7 | P a g e

area rural localities/villages per land in locality/Km2 Km2 1. BENI 7484 4362 58 145 50,7 2. LUBERO 18096 18047 99 174 104 3. RUTSHURU 5289 5259 99,4 111 48 4. MASISI 4744 4704 99 96 49 5. WALIKALE 23475 23475 100 90 260 6. NYIRAGONGO 163 163 100 54 9

Source : Provincial division plan of NorthKivu.

The following comes out clearly from this table: The NorthKivu province is predominantly rural. It is only Beni territory that has a large proportion of urban land. This is due mainly to the fact that many farms are owned by former colonialists. This is therefore the case since colonial times. See the table below. Moreover, the locality with the small average size per locality is found in NYIRAGONGO whereas WALIKALE has more than 250KM 2 per locality.

B. PRESENTATION OF THE LAND ADMINISTRATION PLAN.

NorthKivu province is devided into the following 7 land constituencies. 1. Goma: covers Goma town the headquarters of the province. 2. Butembo: covers the town of Butembo and the chiefdoms/collectivities of Baswagha, Bapere in Lubero and Bashu in Beni. 3. Kayna: covers Bamate Batangi collectivities. 4. Rutshuru: Covers Rutshuru territory. 5. Masisi: covers Masisi territory. 6. Oicha: covers Beni Mbau, Watalinga, and Rwenzori. 7. Beni: covers Beni town. The province’s coverage in land services is still inadequate in that the cities/towns of Goma, Butembo and Beni are the only ones close to the services. Table n° 5 : Area land coverage:

N° DISTRICT ENTITY COVERED AREA TOTAL Km2 POPULATION. 1. Goma Goma town 75,72 TOTAL AREA 75,72 2. Butembo Butembo town 190,7 Bapere community 8.872 Baswagha community 3.640 493.347 Bashu community 1.754 TOTAL AREA 14.456 3. KAYNA Bamate community 1.776 324.088 Batangi community 3.786 Kirumba town 5 Kayna town 8 Kanyabayonga town 9 TOTAL AREA 5.584

8 | P a g e

4. Rutshuru Territoire de Rutshuru 5.259 Kiwandja town 30 TOTAL AREA 5.289 5. Masisi Masisi territory 4.744 366.680+ BASHALI TOTAL AREA 4.744 6. Oicha Oicha town 93 BeniMbau community 2.589 Rwenzori community 2.496 Watalinga community 610 TOTAL AREA 5788 7. Beni Beni town 58 TOTAL AREA 58

This table clearly shows that land services cover very large areas and therefore, their geographical accessibility remains a problem especially for rural populations. In fact, there are great distances for these people to get to the offices of the various land divisions. The smaller districts are: Beni: 58 Km 2, Goma: 75.72Km 2 respectively. The whole territory of Masisi has only one land division and Rutshuru has two. Moreover, the largest constituency/district is Butembo with 14,456km 2, more than half of Burundi. In addition, the province of North Kivu, is itself larger than Rwanda and Burundi put together totaling 51,000Km 2 against 59,631km 2 of North Kivu.

III. OCCUPATION OF RURAL LAND IN NORTH KIVU PROVINCE.

For this chapter, we present results from the study carried out on the ground on the land use by farmers and large planters. These data were enriched by information collected in different documents available at the agricropural services offices at the provincial and terrirorial level.

9 | P a g e

III.1. LIST OF PLANTATIONS IN NORTH-KIVU

1. TERRITOIRE DE LUBERO

NAME OF NAME OF TOTAL N° LANTATION LOCATION FORMER OWNER ACQUIRER OCCUPATION TITLE Hect. AREA in value SPECULATION OBSERVATION

10ha taken by the 1 VUGOGHO Kanyabayonga Bouher Arnold Mwigha Masinda Cert. Of ownership 50 40 coffee town 9ha of quinquina

2 MIKUTA Bulotwa Danly Hirlem Pandele Sh Cert. Of ownership 64 50 quinquina and food crop Inhabited + food

3 BULOTWA Bulotwa Clignet Kyamakya Marc Allotment letter 200 coffee crop concession en conf

4 BULENGERA Bulengera Joye Alberic Muhindo K Request for land 100 14 coffee 5 NDEREMBI Nderembi Joye Daniel Kambale M Request for land 100 8 coffee Food crops Insufficient land for

6 ITALA Itala Du Bois Kambale M Request for land 100 3 cassava exploitation

7 KINYONDO Kinyondo Albale Trier Kahindo Map Certificate 73 13 coffee + quinquina 8 BWALEYRE Kayna Prud'homme Muratusi K Contract 100 4 coffee population

9 KAYNA Kayna Vanos Mungumwa Kas Contract 73 15 coffee taken by the town 10 KAHURU II Kayna Froidmond Katsuva Tay Request for land 100 coffee Not maintained 11 KAHURU I Kayna Sierge du Bois Kambere Mule Allotment letter 50 30 coffee not maintained

12 KASANDO Kasando Gouvea Kambere Mule Certificate 284 34 coffee + quinquina plus food crop 13 KISUYI Kayna Dupont Louis Katsongo M Certificate 50 31 coffee not maintained 14 IVATAMA Kayna Arban André Kioma Wandi Certificate 100 60 coffee not maintained 15 MKAMUMBA Kayna Michel Paluku Luhotwa Certificate 100 12 coffee not maintained 16 MULIRAMO Kayna Nick Albert SOLPOKI 54 20 coffee not maintained Bloc

17 KAKOVERO Lwangongo Marchal Van L Kasereka Luv Contract 101 50 coffee not maintained 18 TUVALI Musienene De Buldeling Kakule Kal Contract 202 tea In conflict

10 | P a g e

19 KYAVIKERE Mageria Van Over Berg Kasereka Luv Allotment letter 50 50 coffee + quinquina Tea factory 20 VUKEKEMA Luotu Van Doorken Katsuva Kirivutsi 3 3 coffee coffee+food crop

21 KAVALE Musienene Van Over Berg Magateso tea + afforestation 22 KAVETYA Muhangi Van Stan Kiste Mathe + Katimba Allotment letter 68 40 coffee 23 TOMU Biambwe Garles Robert Kasereka sivi Allotment letter 100 coffee robusta 24 MULENDU Mabambi Hambert Lucien Mahamba vyakera Request for land 100 5 coffee 25 NDEKO Mabambi Gyemberg Paluku Kaghe contract 90 40 coffee 26 NGONGI Mabambi Gyemberg Mumbere Muh Request for land 30 30 Food crop 27 KAVALI/LUBERO Lubero Brossens Kambale Viso certificate 100 30 Food crop 28 KIVIKA Kimbulu Martens Mukeleghe contract 25 25 quinquina 29 MULUNDI I Mabambi Van Gasse Paluku Lolwako certificate 115 11 coffee+ Food crop 30 MULUNDI II Mabambi Gysemberg Katembo Vuma contract 32 32 coffee 31 KITOVO Muhangi Dejager Makembe Kindoho contract 50 46 coffee 32 KHIMA Katolo Hannape Maunga Kimbute contract 29 20 afforestation 33 KAVALI/LUBERO Musienene Baby Alfred Magateso contract 28 10 quinquina Food crop 34 KAVANDA I ET II Kyambogho Gregorien Kambere Kyas contract 37 37 Afforestation +reafforestation 35 NGOLOBWE Kyambogho Davidopoules K Bindo contract 28 28 afforestation 36 KALEGHA Mabambi Van Cupsen COOFICO Butembo 120 5 quinquina 37 MALENDE Malende Van Daele Rubindo lusi 21 20 quinquina+afforestation 38 MALENDE Malende Liane Victor Kahindo Ndekesisri 10 10 afforestation 2937 789

2. NYIRAGONGO TERRITORY 1 NYAKABANDA Nyakabanda Liesson Gatariki Ntwali Acte de cession 20 20 afforestation+ Food crop not maintained 2 JOLI BOIS Byahi Clevaux Banzira n°52/7 34 34 afforestation+ Food crop not maintained 3 BAHA II Byahi Geens Buzigiye contract 23 23 afforestation+ Food crop not maintained 77 77 3. WALIKALE TERRITORY 1 HOMBO Hombo Van de Walleg Mme Mahamba Allotment N°600 300 300 Oil palm maintained 2 KILAMBO Kilambo Rochus Léon Soda Shani Allotment N°2278 85 80 coffee robusta maintained 3 MUTOYO Mutoyo Van Dorpe Okenge Allotment N°2276 60 60 coffee robusta maintained 4 KITATENDE Kitatenge Van Weteer Kibira Katarungu Allotment N°2276 300 300 coffee robusta maintained

11 | P a g e

5 NDIPO I Ndipo Stielties W Lihau 50 50 coffee robusta maintained 6 NDIPO II Ndipo Stielties Roberto Lihau 50 50 coffee robusta maintained 7 MILUNGU Milungu Schietekala 11 11 coffee robusta maintained 8 TCHAMAKA Tchamaka Lemaire jules Ets OSAKOWALO 198 45 coffee robusta maintained 9 OSOKARI Osokari Thelmissen A Ets KIMA 95 35 coffee robusta maintained

Maintaine 10 LUGO (WASSA) Logu (Wassa) Latinis 7 7 coffee robusta d 11 Kanga Van Ecknaut Shemakuru 50 50 coffee robusta maintained 12 NGORA Ngora Fauconnier Kibira Katarungu Allotment N°227725 25 25 coffee robusta maintained 13 IHULA Ihula Renard 605 6,5 tea Not maintained 14 KAMISUKU Kamisuku Brainbant j, 20 Oil palm + coffee maintained 15 RUHENZI Ruhenzi Bex Butu Biandimeno 30 30 coffee robusta maintained 16 ILUNGA Ilunga Rochus Léon Lwamiango 15 10 Oil palm maintained 17 NDIPPO III Ndipo Stieljes A. 50 50 coffee robusta maintained 18 DJEMBE Kitatenge Matelaer J. Ets KIMA 275 coffee robusta maintained 19 KITIMBATIMBA Kitimbatimba Latinis Ets KIMA 50 15 coffee robusta maintained 20 OSOKARI Osokari Brainbant j, Ets OSAKO WALO 20 20 coffee robusta maintained 2296 4. MASISI TERRITORY 1 THEKI NYABIONDO Nyabiondo Duprez Mwananteba 1000 550 tea, reafforestation, crop 2 KISHENGO THEKI KITU Kitu Mahanga Herman Population 78 178 tea, crop 3 MAHANGA Mahanga Duprez Mwananteba 582 375 tea, crop 4 LOASHI Loashi Cauwe Ngezayo K 319 284 tea, crop, reafforestation 5 BUHENDA Buhenda Cauwe Kanunga Ruti 600 350 tea, crop, reafforestation 6 KIMOO Kimoo Herman Baeni 300 280 crop 7 NDANDU Ndandu Antoine Kitsa Kitambala 89 89 crop, reafforestation 8 NYANGE Nyange Cauwe Muhima 190 180 tea, crop, reafforestation 9 NGURU Nguru Deprez Nzamukwereka 86 86 tea, crop 10 NYABURA Nyabura Laurent Kasuku wa Ngeo 600 tea, crop 11 SALMBINSALM Nyabura Verlaet SalmbinSalm 50 50 crop 12 KALEMBE Kalembe Naleonry Fataki 50 58 crop 13 KALEMBE Kalembe Muhima K Fataki 50 50 crop 14 MULIHO Muliho Tassin Hern Kasuku wa Ngeo 120 120 tea, crop 15 MIHARA Mihara Van Den Dael Mutoo Murayiri 100 75 tea, crop 12 | P a g e

16 NGURU Nguru Cuyt Camil Nzamukwereka 50 50 tea, crop 17 MUHANGA LUK Muhanga Veri Houts Rwakineza 52 52 tea, crop 18 KIPFUMWE Kipfumwe Grelle Léen Rwakineza 127 127 tea, crop 19 KIHIMBA Kihimba Van Der Weekf Mbiyirwa 143 127 tea, crop 20 KIHIMBA Kihimba Dewittiyou Bisukiro 14 tea, crop 21 KAHIRA Kahira Fievettean Bisukiro 38 tea, crop 22 NGURU Nguru Gerris Ferdinand Salumu 50 tea, crop 23 KAHIRA Kahira Sydenjean Habimana 82 tea, crop 24 KASHASHA Kashasha Bucherotto Habimana 39 tea, crop 25 LUKULU Lukulu Bormyears Farm Espérance 92 tea, crop 26 NGURU Nguru Guytcamil Nzamukwereka 50 tea, crop 27 NGURU Nguru Guytcamil Habimana 50 tea, crop 28 MIHARA Minanga Delabie Nzamukwereka 70 tea, crop 29 MWESO Mweso Van Slemboruoc Hangi tea, crop 30 RUSINCHA Rusincha Van Nayeurachi Bashali Mokoto tea, crop 31 SHASHA Shasha Brakan Munyandutiye 119 100 coffee trees, crop 32 KITUMBILI Kitumbili Deroche Salumu 85 coffee trees, crop 33 NGUMBA Ngumba Plumier Salumu 168 coffee trees, crop 34 BWAMBALIRO Bwambaliro Brotheren Ruyange 160 coffee trees, crop 35 KISHAKA Kishaka Chrystchoscours Madimba 70 coffee trees, crop 36 LUSHANGI Lushangi Chrystchoscours Kibira Katarungu 300 coffee trees, crop 37 KIULI Kiuli Marchal Madimba 400 coffee trees, crop 38 LUHONGA Luhonga Jetta Mukendi 300 coffee trees, crop 39 BWINCHA Bwincha Dulet Willam 31 coffee trees, crop 40 MUGANDO Mugando Marchal Nyota 30 coffee trees, crop 41 KIMOKA Kimoka Bresky Hangi Masikini 30 coffee trees, crop 42 CADUKI/UDKE Caduki Chrystchoscours Kibira Katarungu 200 coffee trees, crop 43 KECOLUINDI Luindi Ritiwegor Kimbwa 410 quinquina 44 KOBE Kobe Chrystchoscours Kibira Katarungu 50 coffee trees, crop 45 MINDI Mindi Descoth Tussi 190 crop, reafforestation

46 NGWIRO Ngwiro Descoth Population 100 crop, fishfarming 47 MUKOHWA Mukohwa Rombeau Bakungu Phuna 30 crop

48 NGUMBA Ngumba Vend Ven Mirimo 14 crop 13 | P a g e

49 KIPFUMU Kipfumu CNKI block Bakungu Mayao 112 crop 50 KIPFUMU Kipfumu CNKI block Bakungu Kalwy 112 crop 51 NYANGE Nyange CNKI block Muhima 120 crop 52 MUKOHWA Mukohwa Rombeau Bakungo Phuna 15 crop 53 NGEREKO Ngereko CNKI block Baramisi Crop 54 KIPFUMU Kipfumu CNKI block Population 120 crop 8237

5. BENI TERRITORY 1 MANGODOMU MANGODOMU Baddy Alfred Lutu Luwanya 93 93 Food crops in cleanup 2 KYATSABA KYATSABA Drapier Kasereka Matemuli 179 179 Food crops in cleanup 3 NZUKI NZUKI Imerie et Lale CAPACO 68 68 food crops in cleanup 4 MBOSO MBOSO Cibrario CAPACO 40 40 food crops in cleanup 5 BINGO BINGO Jacques Kahindo Ndekesiri 500 500 food crops in cleanup 6 BINGO BINGO Paluku Sivirwa Ngba Mwana 80 80 food crops in cleanup 7 BINGO BINGO Desiron Mambo 125 125 food crops in cleanup 8 MANGANGO MANGANGO Maio de Souze Noguetra et cie 600 600 food crops in cleanup 9 MANGANGO MANGANGO Odysse Os André PLANOKI 186 186 food crops in cleanup 10 MANGANGO MANGANGO Odysse Os André PLANOKI 95 95 food crops in cleanup 11 LUWOLA LUWOLA Odysse Os André PLANOKI 100 100 food crops in cleanup 12 NGITE NGITE Odysse Os André PLANOKI 100 100 food crops in cleanup 13 NAMIKI NAMIKI Odysse Os André PLANOKI 100 100 food crops in cleanup 14 MATABI MATABI Odysse Os André PLANOKI 100 100 food crops in cleanup 15 MANGANGO MANGANGO Kissing Momene Mo M 3 3 food crops in cleanup 16 MANGANGO MANGANGO Piters Fernando Momene Mo M 100 100 food crops in cleanup 17 TABIE TABIE Thubaut Hubert Katembo Mbanga 100 100 food crops in cleanup 18 TABIE TABIE Van Boie Gahunga Ruti 100 100 food crops in cleanup 19 MANGANGO MANGANGO Bousman Léopold Chimanuka 55 55 food crops in cleanup 20 NYALEKE NYALEKE Nerinks Kambale Machozi 68 68 food crops in cleanup 21 TABIE TABIE Matarangas Kalinda Rukisi 127 127 food crops in cleanup 22 MUNDUBIENA MUNDUBIENA Paluku Sivirwa Ngba Mwana 80 80 food crops in cleanup 23 MANGANGO MANGANGO Kura Sulemani Ngba Mwana 50 50 food crops in cleanup 24 MAVIVI MAVIVI Zaphrakis SOZADECHANGES 160 160 food crops in cleanup

14 | P a g e

Became Maba 25 ANDELEA ANDELEA Lurkin Félicien Amisi 50 50 food crops village 26 ANDELEA ANDELEA Merner Guy Amisi 50 50 food crops in cleanup 27 LUBENA LUBENA Butten Fryears Amisi 75 75 food crops in cleanup 28 MALONDO MALONDO Pirard Saleh Bin Saleh 50 50 food crops in cleanup 29 LUHULE LUHULE Van Ancker Lievin Saleh Bin Saleh 100 100 food crops in cleanup 30 INGOBO INGOBO Van Roie Ntite TshiEnda 50 50 food crops in cleanup 31 MAY MOYA MAY MOYA Maio de Souze CUGEKI/Butembo 100 100 food crops in cleanup 32 TUNGUDU TUNGUDU Ophoven Anguwandia Diunu 125 25 Oil palm vieux palmiers 33 MAMBUNE MAMBUNE Gregorio Kasereka Mukand 75,34 food crops in cleanup 34 MALIOBA MALIOBA Jaumin et Van Roie Kakule Kyoghero 100 100 Oil palm, food crops in cleanup KATWAKAVA

35 KATWAKAVANI NI Jaumin et Van Roie Muhindo Kyuma 256 food crops in cleanup 36 DUDUANZI DUDUANZI jaumin et Van Roie Muhindo Kyuma 2 2 food crops in cleanup 37 MAMBOLIO MAMBOLIO Michel Ernest Kapitula 75 75 food crops in cleanup KONGOLI

38 KONGOLI KIMA KIMA CNKI block Mumbere Ndianabo 272 food crops in cleanup 39 MAMBUNE MAMBUNE Jaumin Marcel Kyoma Malikidogo 71 food crops in cleanup 40 LUHULE LUHULE Sweron Maître Ghiofa 75 75 food crops in cleanup 41 BLOC KISANGANI Sweron Maître Ghiofa 182 food crops population 42 TABI TABI Van Ardes Rutanuka 100 100 food crops population MANZAMUND

43 MANZAMUNDO O CNKI block Van Hoof Louis 84 84 food crops population 44 MADIWE KIBWE MADIWE KIBWE CNKI block Van Hoof Louis 100 100 food crops population 45 ALOYA MADIWE ALOYA MADIWE CNKI block Van Hoof Louis 90 90 food crops population 46 MAMBENA MAMBENA CNKI block Kasereka Kasi 400 400 food crops population MANZAMUND

47 MANZAMUNDO O CNKI block Katembo Vuma 100 100 food crops population MANZAMUND

48 MANZAMUNDO O Pierrard Katembo Vuma 120 120 food crops population 49 MASANGI MASANGI Pierrard Kayembe Manda 65 food crops population 50 MALONDO MALONDO Lagière Claude Kayembe Manda 50 50 food crops population 51 MALONDO MALONDO CNKI block Kayembe Manda 50 50 food crops population 52 TABI TABI CNKI block Millor Roger 131 131 food crops population 53 TABI TABI CNKI block Millor Roger 80 80 food crops population 54 TABI TABI CNKI block Millor Roger 98 98 food crops population 55 TABI TABI CNKI block Millor Roger 78 food crops population 15 | P a g e

56 LUHULE MADIWE LUHULE MADIWE CNKI block Pick Bing Marc 125 food crops population 57 LUHULE MADIWE LUHULE MADIWE CNKI block Pick Bing Marc 114 114 food crops population 58 LUHULE MADIWE LUHULE MADIWE CNKI block Pick Bing Marc 100 100 food crops population 6802 6. RUTSHURU TERRITORY 1 NYABIKORO gpt Jomba Baeten Ndemeye 21 18 Quinquina maintained 2 NYAKARIBA gpt Jomba Kambale Ndemeye 48 7 Quinquina maintained 3 KALENGE gpt Jomba Quinet Rwakabuba 48 Quinquina maintained 4 TSHENGERE I gpt Jomba PHARMAKINA PHARMAKINA 190 110 Quinquina maintained 5 TSHENGERE II gpt Jomba Bertholet Bishogoro 52 Quinquina maintained 6 RUBAHIRA gpt Busanza Henri Munyatwari 132 20 Coffee arabica maintained 7 RWAMPISI gpt Busanza Vano Araut Nyiringabo 95 5 Coffee arabica maintained 8 LUBIRIZI gpt Busanza Jamar G NdezeIrivuzumwami 211 15 Coffee arabica maintained 9 BAHUGA gpt Busanza Gustine Gustine 150 Coffee arabica maintained 10 PUNGA gpt Busanza Tulken Gerard Kijibwami 202 15 coffee arab+ food crops maintained 11 RWANYANI gpt Busanza Vengetines Bahizi Kabunga 259 3 coffee arab+ food crops maintained 12 RUGARAMA gpt Busanza Lebrun Sembemba maintained

coffee rob+food Maintaine 13 KANYAMAGANA gpt Busanza Lebrun Midiburo 150 6 crops d 14 MUGOGO gpt Busanza Bavay Bavay 65 11 coffee rob+ food crops maintained 15 KATIKINYANGE gpt Busanza Lays Sekabuhoro 52 coffee rob+ food crops maintained 16 BUGANI II gpt Bweza N°1 Genrani Ntamashakiro 54 52 coffee trees maintained 17 KASEKE gpt Bweza Mares Gaukha Baderabusha 45 30 coffee trees maintained 18 MBIGO gpt Bweza Schimit Charles Schinit Charles 250 18,5 Quinquina maintained 19 RWAREMA gpt Bweza Comelliaux PHARMAKINA Quinquina maintained CMC/RWAKABU

20 BUBANGA gpt Bweza BA CMC/RWAKABUBA 27 Factory+coffee arab Good MUHANGA gpt Bweza Colsen Trees Domaine de Katale 50 50 coffee arabica Good 21 RUSEKE gpt Bweza Ricohillario Aza Obito 55 coffee arabica+food crops Good 22 KAHUNGA gpt Bukoma Galvatas Nzanzu Kirarahumu 98 coffee+palm tree Good 23 KAHUNGA gpt Bukoma Tomson Kambale 26 coffee trees 24 KAYIBOSHERA gpt Bukoma Lera Constantin Kambale Tshumb 25 25 MAIBO KAHUNGA gpt Bukoma Daniz 26 KAHUNGA gpt Bukoma M, Orry Kalonga Tsisera 100 coffee trees

16 | P a g e

27 KINYANDONYI gpt Bukoma Lebrun Semey Ryamukuru 500 coffee trees 28 BUSEPENGENYI gpt Bukoma Carnien Bizimana Ndungutse 300 coffee trees 29 NYABIKWANGA gpt Bukoma Besabele Mukubanya 100 30 KANYABUSEKE gpt Bukoma Stingi Lambe Ruz Mr Remis 87 31 KAGARAT gpt Bukoma Gikoriki Rukoriki 735 32 KATORO gpt Bukoma Emile Besad Rukoriki 100 33 KANYAMONDO gpt Bukoma Corbisier Bisukiro 150 34 KISISILE gpt Bukoma Van Over Berg Domaine de Katale 143,6 35 KALEHE gpt Bukoma Debrun Domaine de Katale 250 36 NIONGERA II gpt Bukoma Michel Maro Domaine de Katale 100 37 NIONGERA III gpt Bukoma Gallaux Domaine de Katale 100 38 NIONGERA I gpt Bukoma Remy Domaine de Katale 101 39 KARAMBI gpt Bukoma Etienne Paul Domaine de Katale 63 40 BUGABO II gpt Bukoma Dhagos Ruz Mr Remis 82 coffee arabica 41 BUGABO I gpt Bukoma De Veillis Ngezayo Kambale 81 42 RWABIZO gpt Bukoma Salvi Salvo Femme Bahizi 42,5 43 KIBUTUTU gpt Bukoma CNKI block Ruz Mr Remis 80 44 MUNANIRA gpt Bukoma Derry Jean Ndeze Ndabizi 6,12 Pasture 45 MAYYAIVI gpt Bukoma Recoriel Kayitenkore 100 24 Banana trees 46 KATWIGURU II gpt Binza Thomson Pierre Esembe 100 47 MUZINGA gpt Binza Bahizi Bahizi Kabunga 100 coffee robusta 48 KATWIGURU III gpt Binza Leis Patrice 100 coffee robusta 49 MUSUMBA I gpt Binza De Lancer Kambere 100 coffee robusta 50 MUSUMBA II gpt Binza Baudart Tsongo 50 12 coffee robusta 51 MURAMBI I gpt Binza Baudart Long Okitora 50 15 coffee robusta 52 MURAMBI II gpt Binza Salvi Salvo Mukendi Mbuyi 50 5 coffee robusta 53 KAKWALE gpt Binza Mangat Le Jong Jean 115 15 coffee robusta 54 KASABABANDA gpt Binza Bertholet 100 coffee robusta 55 BURAMBA gpt Binza Manigini Ndabishonoye 150 5 coffee+palm trees 56 NYAMILIMA gpt Binza Thomson Pierre Eglise Catholique 100 57 KATALE qpt Kisigari Van de Vivere Domaine de Katale 451 NR coffee robusta 58 BILUMA qpt Kisigari Van de Vivere Domaine de Katale 500 NR coffee robusta 59 RWANKI qpt Kisigari Van Quen Berche Domaine de Katale 21 19 coffee robusta 60 NYABIKERE qpt Kisigari Van Quen Berche Domaine de Katale 186 NR coffee robusta

17 | P a g e

61 NYAKAGEZI qpt Kisigari Diner Domaine de Katale 135 NR coffee robusta 62 KITERANA qpt Kisigari Cavalli Domaine de Katale 61 NR coffee robusta 63 NYAKAGEZI qpt Kisigari De Brun Domaine de Katale 20 NR coffee robusta 64 KALENGERA qpt Kisigari Cavalli Domaine de Katale 228 60 coffee arabica Very good 65 KIGARAMA qpt Kisigari Rigon Freres Domaine de Katale 82 48 coffee arabica Very good 66 BUBANGA qpt Kisigari De Meuten Domaine de Katale 45 25 coffee arabica Very good 67 RUBARE qpt Kisigari 172 70 coffee arabica Very good 68 RUBARE qpt Kisigari Very good 69 KABANO qpt Kisigari Van Over Berg Domaine de Katale 48 NR coffee arabica Very good Very 70 ISHULO MATEBE qpt Kisigari Boel Domaine de Katale 230 NR coffee arabica good 71 HANGI qpt Kisigari Huwart Domaine de Katale 95 60 coffee arabica Very good 72 HANGI KIRWA qpt Kisigari Van Destein Domaine de Katale 12 8,5 coffee arabica Very good 73 BUGANI qpt Kisigari D'Anethan Domaine de Katale 51 NR coffee arabica Very good 74 KIVUNGA qpt Kisigari Donaert Franc Ndabishoboye 234 120 coffee arabica Very good 75 TSHIMA qpt Kisigari Donaert Franc Ndabishoboye 60 45 coffee arabica Very good 76 ISHASHAZA qpt Kisigari Donaert Franc Ndabishoboye 100 30 coffee arabica Very good 77 KABASENGO qpt Kisigari Sperembehie Renzaho 100 30 coffee arabica Very good 78 NYAMUHENDO qpt Kisigari Martin Rwakabuba 240 240 coffee arabica Very good 79 LUTIBA gpt Bukombo Intrever Ntindamahina 70 38 80 LUTIBA gpt Bukombo Custine Nicole Custine Nicole 50 44 81 LUTIBA gpt Bukombo Engeles Judo Habangira 96 15 82 MBUSUBUSU gpt Bukombo De Ruyck Kalinda 75 15 83 LUTIBA gpt Bukombo Versstrante Kalinda 50 40 84 NGESHO/LUTIBA gpt Bukombo Versstrante Kalinda 49,75 28,8 85 NGESHO/LUTIBA gpt Bukombo Staclens Sebatware 43 24 86 FUBWE gpt Bukombo Bucquet Aliliwali 50 19 87 KUWEBA gpt Bukombo Manager Aliliwali 88 RUBWE gpt Bukombo Bora Foum Balingene 89 CHANURWA gpt Bukombo Dupont Lucien Mpuhwe 90 FUBWE gpt Bukombo Jean Paroisse de Biramb N.R. N.R. N.R. 91 KATSIRU gpt Bukombo Engeles Judo Nzasamba N.R. N.R. N.R. 92 KATSIRU gpt Bukombo Dahathan N.R. N.R. N.R. 93 KATSIRU gpt Bukombo Verbrunger Rutijana N.R N.R. N.R.

18 | P a g e

94 BULANDA gpt Bukombo Locat Rutijana N.R. N.R. N.R. 95 KYUMBA gpt Bukombo Bieles Rutijana N.R. N.R. N.R. 96 KYUMBA gpt Bukombo Bieles Rutijana N.R. N.R. N.R. 97 RUSHEBERE gpt Bukombo Maurice jean Rutijana N.R. N.R. N.R. 98 KATSIRU II gpt Bukombo Deloo Cysille Bauma N.R. N.R. N.R. 99 KATSIRU IV gpt Bukombo Verseesch Tshani N.R N.R. N.R. 100 KATSIRU III gpt Bukombo Mme Peeters Kamanzi N.R. N.R. N.R. 101 KATSIRU IV gpt Bukombo Mm de Witer R.N.D. N.R. N.R. N.R. 102 KATYAZO gpt Bukombo Orthmyears R.N.D. N.R. N.R. N.R. 103 MWESO/HONERO gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. 104 KATSIRA gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. 105 KATSIRA gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R N.R. N.R. 106 KATSIRA gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. 107 LUBATI gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. 108 LUBATI gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. 109 KAHE MARAIS gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. 110 MOHE II gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. 111 KIFUMBU gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R N.R. N.R. 112 MOHEIII gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. 113 MOHE I gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. 114 KIHONGA gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. 115 KIHONGA gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. 116 MUBIGO gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R N.R. N.R. 117 RUGIMBI I gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. 118 RUGIMBI gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. 119 GOODOBWA gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. 120 KAVUO gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. 121 KARAMBI gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. 122 KYAHEMBA gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R N.R. N.R. 123 HIFO gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. 124 NGORA gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. 125 NGESHO gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. 126 NGESHO gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. 127 KITWA KISHAM gpt Kihondo N.R. N.R N.R N.R. N.R.

19 | P a g e

128 MALAMA gpt Kihondo N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. 129 MOTO MOYA gpt Kihondo N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. gpt

130 BUSIGHA Kanyabayonga N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. gpt

131 BITONGI I Kanyabayonga N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. gpt

132 KITIBITO Kanyabayonga N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. DESCHOUTTE 133 STE N.R. N.R N.R N.R. N.R. 134 NYANZALE gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. 135 BUSURURURU gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. 136 KINYATSI II gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. 137 IKALE gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. 138 gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R N.R. N.R. 139 gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. 140 gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. 141 gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. 142 gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. 143 RUSIGHA gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. 144 KABILANGIRIRO gpt Mutand N.R. N.R N.R N.R. N.R. . 145 KAHUKO gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. 146 KABATI II gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. 147 KABATI II gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. 148 KABATI MUTI gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. gpt 149 MUSHEBESHEBE Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. . 150 KYANGOMA gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. 151 MUTANDA I gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. 152 MUTANDA II gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R N.R. N.R. 153 KILIMA I gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. 154 KILIMA II gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. 155 KILIMA III gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. 156 KIBUNGU gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. 157 KALUMBIA gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.

20 | P a g e

III.2. LIST OF FARMS IN NORTH KIVU

1. RUTSHURU TERRITORY

NAME OF THE FORMER TOTAL IN N° FARM LOCATION OWNER NAME OF ACQUIRER TITLE OF OCCUPATION AREA VALUE SPECULATION OBSERVATION

1 ISHASHAZA gpt Binza Goodard Farncis Ndeze Ndabishobo 10030 Livestock rearing, caprins maintained 2 LUBWE SUD gpt Kihondo Plantinkx Buunda Birere 125 120 Livestock rearing, maintained

3 NGESHO gpt Bishusha Sapieha Adam Mwenenge Afamasa 189,5 111 Livestock rearing Not maintained

4 LUBATI gpt Bishusha Ghilain Jean Mwenenge Afamasa 109,7 103 Livestock rearing Not maintained Mme Renard Van

5 KINYATSI III gpt Kihondo PE Nzabakurukiza 68 35 Livestock rearing Maintained 6 KINYATSI III gpt Kihondo Van PEE EPS Nzabakurukiza 295 295 Livestock rearing maintained 7 LUBWE NORD gpt Kihondo GEER Roger CECUBWI 120 10 Livestock rearing maintained 8 KITWA KESH gpt Kihondo Mouche Pierre Semuchacha 110 60 Livestock rearing maintained 9 MUTU MOYA gpt Jomba Colle Etienne Kakule Kahita 228 8 Livestock rearing maintained 10 MUNZIRARWE gpt Jomba Dementen Musonerwa 15 15 Livestock rearing maintained 11 KINYANGURUBE gpt Jomba Dementen Musonerwa 15 15 Livestock rearing maintained 12 KAMIRA gpt Jomba Comellion Segihobe 74 74 Livestock rearing maintained 13 SINGA gpt Busanza Lebrun Rwamukuru 192 192 Livestock rearing maintained 14 RUGARAMA gpt Busanza Lebrun Sembeba Livestock rearing maintained 15 KANYAMAGANA III gpt Busanza Lebrun Kibiribiri 156 156 Livestock rearing maintained 16 CHIBUMBA GAHINGA gpt Bweza Gatsama 70 50 Livestock rearing maintained 17 KANYABUSORO gpt Bweza Trout Munyarubega 25 Livestock rearing maintained 18 BUREKEKENYE gpt Bukoma Renten Kibiribiri 156 Livestock rearing maintained 19 KATEMBA gpt Bukoma Salvio Salvo Ngezayo 81 81 Livestock rearing maintained 20 BUHIMBA gpt Bukoma De sa Delier Kasongo Shuyaka 65 65 Livestock rearing Not maintained 21 BUGINA gpt Bukoma Norfreel Kalombo 70 Livestock rearing Not maintained 22 KAHUNGA gpt Bukoma Kayuzi 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained

21 | P a g e

23 KATWIGURU I gpt Binza Van Nebrun Munyamihana 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained 24 BUMA gpt Binza Ackermas M Ndeze Irivuzumwami 100 100 Livestock rearing maintained 25 MUSUMBA II gpt Binza Steckers Mbeza Mihigo 67,5 60 Livestock rearing maintained 26 BINWABIKE/LUTIBA gpt Bukombo Verstraete Kalinda Sekwekwe 60 60 Livestock rearing maintained 27 MUHANGA gpt Bukombo Van de Halle Kibingi 101 30 Livestock rearing maintained 28 KANYABUBUNGA gpt Bukombo Van de Halle Mukama 50 35 Livestock rearing maintained 29 LUTIBA gpt Bukombo Windey Lucien Kabuyaya 85,87 30 Livestock rearing maintained 30 BINWABIRE I gpt Bukombo Verbrungen Ndebereya 58 Livestock rearing maintained 31 BINWABIRE I gpt Bukombo Van de kels Chiza Muhigirwa 50 40 Livestock rearing maintained 32 LUTIBA gpt Bukombo Brouskavet Chiza Moromoro 50 47 Livestock rearing maintained 33 LUTIBA gpt Bukombo Deschyver Paroisse Birambizo 64 35ha Livestock rearing maintained 34 KATSIRU I gpt Bukombo Verbrungen Rutijana sebahire 20 20 Livestock rearing maintained 35 KYUMBA gpt Bukombo Bielies Rutijana sebahire 35 35 Livestock rearing maintained 36 KATSIRU III gpt Bukombo Pelters Kamanzi 50 30 Livestock rearing maintained 37 REMERA I gpt Kihondo Kaberuka Kaberuka 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained 38 KIHONGA gpt Kihondo Bielies Kaberuka 200 Livestock rearing maintained 39 NYABINO II gpt Mutanda Deschoutteste Shika Higiro 118 60 Livestock rearing maintained 40 MUSHIKIRI I gpt Mutanda Jumer Gatanazi 123 70 Livestock rearing maintained 41 MUSHIKIRI II gpt Mutanda Stekers Rwigema 262 50 Livestock rearing maintained 42 BIRISHEKE gpt Mutanda Praie Jules Mbishibishi 246 98 Livestock rearing maintained 43 KATWE KITOBOLO gpt Mutanda Staclers Michel Buunda Birere 80 38 Livestock rearing maintained 44 50 30 Livestock rearing maintained 45 46 KAGUO gpt Bishusha Drion Duchapos Nzabakurikiza 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained 47 KIRURUMA gpt Kihondo Kaberuka Kaberuka 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained Service

48 IBAMBE IBAMBE véterinaire Wambugha 259 Livestock rearing maintained 49 KABARUNDI KABARUNDI Drion Duchapos Nzabakurikiza 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained 50 NYAMIRAMIRWA NYAMIRAMIRWA Comeliau Segihobe 74 maintained 51 KITUNDA gpt Kihondo Goodne André Majabo 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained 52 LUNGA Lunga Blon Del Jean Rév Sehene 47 47 Livestock rearing maintained 53 LUBWE NORD Lubwe Roger Ogez Gecubwi 80 88 Livestock rearing maintained TOTAL RUTSHURU 4944,57

2. BENI TERRITORY

22 | P a g e

1 LUMETALYA LUMETALYA Engelen Van Hoof 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained 2 MGOODAYA MGOODAYA Ingels SODAIR 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained 3 MIHUNGA MIHUNGA Ingels SODAIR 170 170 Livestock rearing maintained 4 KYAVISALE KYAVISALE Debremacker Paluku Mutogherwa 99 99 Livestock rearing maintained 5 LWAMISO I LWAMISO I Seneque Paluku Nzoumwa 18 18 Livestock rearing maintained 6 MUHORARO MUHORARO Ingels Ngeleza 150 150 Livestock rearing maintained 7 KANYATSI KANYATSI Mr et Mme Galas Katsuva 18 18 Livestock rearing maintained 8 KILIA KILIA/Mutwanga SODAIR 126,5 126,5 Livestock rearing maintained 9 BIAKOVE BIAKOVE Userding Sivaheswa 100 100 Livestock rearing maintained 10 MAPATA MAPATA Cossee se Sem Colyphtone 100 100 Livestock rearing maintained 11 SULA Bloc SULA Jaumin Marcel Goodabana 34 34 Livestock rearing maintained 12 SULA Bloc SULA De Borggrave Goodabana 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained 13 MILIMA MILIMA Lortie Joel N’Sele 250 250 Livestock rearing maintained 14 KARIMUMBA KARIMUMBA Lortie Joel Kasonia 435 435 Livestock rearing maintained 15 BUNTORA BUNTORA Siroux Fernard Kambale 28 28 Livestock rearing maintained 16 MAVONO MAVONO Lafont Pierre Kahindo Kaviti 36 36 Livestock rearing maintained 17 VUNERERE VUNERERE Bourgs Charles Katunda 14 14 Livestock rearing maintained 18 MOLA MOLA Userding Kakule 35 35 Livestock rearing maintained 19 LUHULE LUHULE Mme Hallin Kayiyembako 15 15 Livestock rearing maintained 20 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained 21 SULA Bloc SULA Thirat Hubert Shabantu Kimayi 120 120 Livestock rearing maintained 22 SULA Bloc SULA Deslahaut J Shabantu Kimayi 25 25 Livestock rearing maintained 23 SULA Bloc SULA Crucitix Shabantu Kimayi 70 70 Livestock rearing maintained 24 BUSINGWA BUSINGWA De Bremacker Muhindo Kyuma 86,67 86,67 Livestock rearing maintained 25 MUTAMBI MUTAMBI Senioutovitch Mbavuvoja 52 52 Livestock rearing maintained 26 BULIKI BULIKI Broos Armand Bwanakawa 150 150 Livestock rearing maintained 27 BIAKOBE BIAKOBE Gevaert Singa 75 75 Livestock rearing maintained 28 KASAMBIRI KASAMBIRI CNKI block Musungo 212 212 Livestock rearing maintained 29 BIAKOBE BIAKOBE CNKI block Mwenge Katungo 155,91 155,9 Livestock rearing maintained 30 LUMETALYA LUMETALYA Chavier SOCOREZA 284 284 Livestock rearing maintained TOTAL BENI

3059,08 3059 3. NYIRAGONGO TERRITORY 1 KIGERI KIGERI COMBIGUE MAKABUZA Contract N°2448.321,9321 21,53 21 Livestock rearing maintained

23 | P a g e

2 KIBIRIGA KIBIRIGA LOIQ MAKABUZA D8/0623137 37 31 Livestock rearing maintained 3 KIBIRIGA KIBIRIGA CUSTINE MAKABUZA D8/E13936,6136 36,61 36 Livestock rearing maintained 4 RWANGUBA RWANGUBA LELUVRE NDEZE IRIVUZUM 37 30 Livestock rearing maintained

TOTAL NYIRAGONGO 126,54 120 4. LUBERO TERRITORY 1 MAHUKA MAHUKA MERGAUX Kambere Muhima 410 100 Livestock rearing maintained 2 BIKARA+WIMBI BIKARA+WIMBI DE LEUZE Paluku Mutongerwa 350 300 Livestock rearing maintained 3 KANYAMBI KANYAMBI DE LEUZE Paluku Mutongerwa 100 80 Livestock rearing maintained 4 KIHEMBA KIHEMBA TRIGALLEZ CAPACO/Beni Livestock rearing maintained 5 KASEA KASEA TRIGALLEZ CAPACO/Beni 40 40 Livestock rearing maintained 6 KATALE KATALE WOMARYEARS CAPACO/Beni Livestock rearing maintained 7 KIHEMBA KIHEMBA TWSTAPLES CAPACO/Beni 25 25 Livestock rearing maintained 8 LININE LININE ENGELBRECHT CAPACO/Beni 49 49 Livestock rearing maintained 9 KATWAKAVAKWE KATWAKAVAKWE DE BOGOODIE CAPACO/Beni 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained 10 BISIGHO BISIGHO MERGAUX Tembo Mwambuli NR NR Livestock rearing maintained 11 NDEKO NDEKO MALFEYT Paluku Kagheni 70 70 Livestock rearing maintained 12 BIKARA+WIMBI BIKARA+WIMBI DAVREAUX Muhindo Kakwenz 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained DE

13 KABIRO II KABIRO II KERCKHOVE Kambale Musiyera 120 50 Livestock rearing maintained 14 KAVALI KAVALI BROSSENS Kambale Katimba 100 80 Livestock rearing maintained 15 KIMBULU KIMBULU ALMEIDA Sindani Hangi 70 60 Livestock rearing maintained 16 KANIERE KANIERE CNKI Kambale Katimba 360 80 Livestock rearing maintained 17 LUSUKWE Parc n°6 LUSUKWE Mme CARIOTIS Muhindo Bayani 50 45 Livestock rearing maintained 18 LUSUKWE Parc n°7 LUSUKWE Mme CARIOTIS Kambale Saaine 85 50 Livestock rearing maintained 19 KINYAMILUMBI KINYAMILUMBI MOREAUX Kambale Kyavire 180 180 Livestock rearing maintained 20 KATOVO KATOVO kasai Musubao 240 100 Livestock rearing maintained 21 KINYAMILALA KINYAMILALA VAN HOUT kakule kaskoti 100 60 Livestock rearing maintained 22 KYALUMGOODO KYALUMGOODO kambale kyavire 126 70 Livestock rearing maintained 23 MUTENGA MUTENGA Katsuva Kimbesa 198 80 Livestock rearing maintained 24 VUSIGHO VUSIGHO ROUSSEAUX Muheko Kahindo 70 70 Livestock rearing maintained 25 BUTUNDULA BUTUNDULA ANDRE Mwigha Masinda 110 100 Livestock rearing maintained 26 LUKWALIHA LUKWALIHA CNKI Kasereka 120 90 Livestock rearing maintained 27 BUSESA BUSESA VOUTERS Kastuva Mutambo 100 60 Livestock rearing maintained 28 KALEMBA/NGUBI KALEMBA/NGUBI D'HALEWIN Mahuka Nganza 50 40 Livestock rearing maintained

24 | P a g e

LWANGONGO Parc 29 n°17 KAYNA CNKI Karushya 100 100 Livestock rearing maintained LWANGONGO Parc 30 n°15 KAYNA CNKI Karushya 102 102 Livestock rearing maintained LWANGONGO Parc 31 n°9 KAYNA CNKI Semakuba 100 70 Livestock rearing maintained LWANGONGO Parc 32 n°19 KAYNA CNKI Kahambu Kiluhu 100 90 Livestock rearing maintained LWANGONGO Parc 33 n°20 KAYNA CNKI Kambale Katehi 100 100 Livestock rearing maintained LWANGONGO Parc 34 n°16 KAYNA CNKI Kambale Muhindo 100 100 Livestock rearing maintained LWANGONGO Parc 35 n°21 KAYNA CNKI Paluku Kabunga 105 105 Livestock rearing maintained LWANGONGO Parc 36 n°18 KAYNA CNKI Paluku Kabunga 139 139 Livestock rearing maintained 37 KAHOHA KAHOHA CNKI Kambale Kihuhani 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained LWANGONGO Parc 38 n°4 KAYNA CNKI Muhindo Kyavakama 100 100 Livestock rearing maintained 39 LUHAHI II LUHAHI CNKI Mkambale Wasim 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained TOTAL LUBERO

4269 2985

5. MASISI TERRITORY 1 LUSHEBERE LUSHEBERE HEPP Diocèse de Goma 200 200 pastureland 2 KATALE KATALE VANDER B Ndakola 50 50 pastureland 3 KATALE KATALE VANDER B Ndakola 20 20 pastureland 4 KATALE KATALE VANDER B Ndakola 16 16 pastureland 5 MUFA MUFA VANDER B Ndakola 103 103 pastureland+crop CNKI

6 MUFA MUFA BLOCK Ndakola 108 108 pastureland+crop 7 TONDO TONDO DUPREZ Mwananteba 200 200 pastureland+crop 8 KITU MAHANGA KITU MAHANGA DUPREZ Mwananteba 120 pastureland CNKI

9 KAZIHIRO KAZIHIRO BLOCK Dhani 150 pastureland+crop Mme

10 MABINGO MABINGO BREBOSIA Mishonya 100 pastureland+crop BLOC

11 MBIZI MBIZI MBIZI Uwimana 111,2 pastureland+crop BLOC

12 MUFA MUFA MBIZI Uwimana 58 pastureland+crop HEDO

13 MUFA MUFA REGUL Uwimana 50 pastureland+crop

25 | P a g e

14 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE DELVAUX Rutsindula 90 pastureland+crop 15 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE DELVAUX Rutsindula 50 pastureland+crop 16 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE DELVAUX Rutsindula 50 pastureland+crop BLOC

17 MBIZI MBIZI MBIZI Dhani 50 pastureland+crop BLOC

18 MBIZI MBIZI MBIZI Mkanirwa 89,25 pastureland+crop VENDER

19 BUHALA BUHALA STCHEL Kulu 174 pastureland+crop CNKI 20 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA BLOCK Bizima Kara 81 81 pastureland CNKI 21 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA BLOCK Bizima Kara 53 53 pastureland CNKI 22 TSHANGULUBE ETSHANGULUB BLOCK Makabuza 129 pastureland 23 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE DELVAUX Ndakola 117 pastureland BLOC

24 MBIZI MBIZI MBIZI Bizima Kara 156 pastureland+crop BLOC

25 MBIZI MBIZI MBIZI Ndakola 200 pastureland CNKI

26 MBIZI MBIZI BLOCK Tukabintabu 120 pastureland+crop CNKI

27 MBIZI MBIZI BLOCK Kakwene 120 pastureland+crop 28 BUHENDA BUHENDA CAUWE Gahunga 150 pastureland+reafforestatio Mme

29 KISHINGIRI KISHINGIRI BREBOSIA Mukaruryearswa 98 pastureland+crop CNKI

30 MBIZI MBIZI BLOCK Kasoza 98 pastureland+crop CNKI 31 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA BLOCK Tukabintabu 95 95 pastureland+reafforestation CNKI 32 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA BLOCK 16,1 16,1 pastureland+crop CNKI 33 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA BLOCK Tukabintabu 34 34 pastureland+reafforestation CNKI 34 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA BLOCK Tukabintabu 25 25 pastureland DESCHOT 35 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE MICHEL Kaneno Muhombo 50 50 pastureland+crop DESCHOT 36 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE MICHEL Kaneno Muhombo 49 49 pastureland+crop DESCHOT 37 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE MICHEL Kaneno Muhombo 44 44 pastureland+crop CNKI 38 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA BLOCK Safi 127 127 pastureland

26 | P a g e

CNKI 39 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA BLOCK Makabuza 128 128 pastureland CNKI 40 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA BLOCK Makabuza 96 96 pastureland CNKI 41 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE BLOCK Muhutu 30,7 30,7 pastureland CNKI 42 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE BLOCK Naguru 50 50 pastureland+reafforestation CNKI 43 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA BLOCK Serushago 62 62 pastureland CNKI

44 MBIZI MBIZI BLOCK Mishiki 65 65 pastureland+crop CNKI

45 MBIZI MBIZI BLOCK Kashani 180 pastureland+crop CNKI

46 MBIZI MBIZI BLOCK Gakwene 55 pastureland+crop CNKI

47 NYABIONDO NYABIONDO BLOCK Shamamba 29 pastureland+crop CNKI 48 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE BLOCK Kamudoga 50 pastureland+crop CNKI

49 MURAMBI MURAMBI BLOCK Néo Apostolique 117 pastureland+crop CNKI 50 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE BLOCK Ritaganirwa 38 pastureland+crop CNKI

51 TSIRU MUFA TSIRU MUFA BLOCK Ndaalitsa 195 pastureland+crop CNKI

52 MURAMBI MURAMBI BLOCK Néo Apostolique 92 pastureland+crop CNKI

53 KAHASHA KAHASHA BLOCK Mutaka 222 pastureland+crop CNKI

54 KAHASHA KAHASHA BLOCK Mutaka 118 pastureland+crop CNKI

55 KAHASHA KAHASHA BLOCK Ndakola 111 pastureland+crop CNKI 56 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA BLOCK Bizima Karah 148 pastureland+crop CNKI 57 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA BLOCK Kalinda 100 pastureland+crop CNKI 58 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA BLOCK Kalinda 50 pastureland+crop CNKI 59 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA BLOCK Kalinda pastureland+crop CNKI 60 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA BLOCK Kalinda pastureland+crop CNKI 61 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE BLOCK Ntakaziharo 39,5 pastureland+crop 62 KIFUMWE KIFUMWE CNKI Ntakaziharo 31 pastureland+crop

27 | P a g e

BLOCK

63 LUAMA III LUAMA III CROBBE Nkizingiko 60 pastureland+crop 64 LUAMA LUAMA CROBBE Nkizingiko 65 pastureland+crop 65 CHUNGO BLOC CHUNGO BLOC CROBBE Nkizingiko 40 pastureland+crop CNKI

66 MUHANGA MUHANGA BLOCK Ndakola 150 pastureland+crop CNKI

67 RUSIKA RUSIKA BLOCK Karuganda 80 80 pastureland+crop CNKI

68 LUSHEBERE LUSHEBERE BLOCK Ndakadayu 60 60 pastureland+crop CNKI

69 KIKOMA KIKOMA BLOCK Mulengezi 147 pastureland+crop CNKI

70 CHUNGO BLOC CHUNGO BLOC BLOCK Nkizingike 40 pastureland+crop 71 LUAMA LUAMA GENARRI Banziziki 82 pastureland+crop 72 LUAMA LUAMA BATIN Banziziki 42 pastureland+crop 73 LUAMA LUAMA VARHALST Sekayange 80 pastureland+crop 74 LUAMA LUAMA VARHALST Mbekoet pastureland+crop 75 NDALAGA NDALAGA DUMON COCOBU 200 200 pastureland+crop 76 NDALAGA NDALAGA DUMON Habyambere 82 82 pastureland+crop 77 BUBOKO BUBOKO MARCHAL Budoni 119 119 pastureland+crop 78 BIRAMBIZO BIRAMBIZO DUVON Monastère/Mokoto 33 33 pastureland+crop 79 KIHIMBA KIHIMBA DEWIT Bisukiro 14 14 pastureland+crop 80 NGURU NGURU DAPREZ Sakina 50 50 pastureland+crop 81 KAHIRA KAHIRA ERNOTTE Muhindo 50 pastureland+crop 82 NGURU NGURU DEPREZ Rwakineza 50 pastureland+crop 83 LUAMA LUAMA BRAKAEN Mukengango 63 pastureland+crop 84 TSHUNGO TSHUNGO DEHERCH Ngerageze 120 pastureland+crop CNKI

85 MUSHWA MUSHWA BLOCK Ruhinya 112 112 pastureland+crop CNKI

86 MUSHWA MUSHWA BLOCK Miburo 118 118 pastureland+crop CNKI 87 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA BLOCK Miburo 98 98 pastureland+crop CNKI 88 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA BLOCK Balinda 200 200 pastureland+crop CNKI 89 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA BLOCK Kabanda 130 130 pastureland+crop 90 BUMBA BUMBA KALINDA Buyore 114 pastureland+crop

28 | P a g e

CNKI

91 NYARUNABA NYARUNABA BLOCK Nguringoma 171,5 100 pastureland+crop CNKI 92 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA BLOCK Gasasita 400 370 pastureland+crop BUNVANTO

93 NYARUNABA NYARUNABA RE Ntunyanzo 171 100 pastureland+crop 94 BUMBA BUMBA Byoyoyo 146 100 pastureland+crop 95 BUHULE BUHULE Komayombi 60 60 pastureland+crop 96 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA Komayombi 60 60 pastureland+crop 97 KAUNDU KAUNDU Serufuli 600 pastureland+crop 98 OSSO OSSO Bisengimana 1000 900 pastureland+crop MINENCHI

99 BUNYOLE BUNYOLE N Ngezayo 200 200 pastureland+crop 100 MUSHUNUNU MUSHUNUNU KALINDA Ngezayo 100 100 pastureland+crop 101 KASHASHA KASHASHA SHABA Mugenzi NR NR pastureland+crop 102 MIRUMBA MIRUMBA KASUKU Karuretwa 63 pastureland+crop 103 MUSHUNUNU MUSHUNUNU Rwabahenda pastureland+crop CNKI

104 KAHASHA KAHASHA BLOCK Ndakola 112 pastureland+crop CNKI

105 MBIZI MBIZI BLOCK Mbua 24 pastureland+crop Mme

106 MUKOHWA MUKOHWA ROMBEAU Kasese 100 pastureland+crop CNKI

107 MUKOHWA MUKOHWA BLOCK Mastaki 50 pastureland+crop 108 CNKI

109 LULAMBO LULAMBO BLOCK Karunganda 170 pastureland+crop CNKI

110 RUSIKA RUSIKA BLOCK Kaboyi 30 pastureland+crop 111 NGUNGU NGUNGU Mme SHARE Rusangiza pastureland+crop 112 NGUNGU NGUNGU Rubibi 103 pastureland+crop MEYA

113 NGUNGU NGUNGU ALBERT Mbarusha 58 pastureland+crop MOUS

114 NGUNGU NGUNGU AMBROISE Bitegesimana 43 pastureland+crop NOUSPEIGN

115 NGUNGU NGUNGU OUS Kitsa Mutumayi 30 pastureland+crop 116 NGUNGU NGUNGU VIET BORS Kabera 50 pastureland+crop Mlle

117 NGUNGU NGUNGU GRUME Kajibwana 50 pastureland+crop 118 BISHASHA BISHASHA MICHELAR Ndachombenze 118 pastureland+crop

29 | P a g e

119 BISHASHA BISHASHA Nkundaka pastureland+crop 120 BUMBA BUMBA DERONDE Ndahombakare 100 pastureland+crop 121 TEBERO TEBERO LEON Bulenda 91 pastureland+crop 122 MUANVURA MUANVURA PONEELET Ngaeyo 36 pastureland+crop BORNYEAR

123 MUANVURA MUANVURA S Karangwa 81 pastureland+crop 124 MUKOBERWA MUKOBERWA DUMON Gahananyi 100 pastureland+crop BANDENHE

125 MUHANIRA MUHANIRA UVE Kanyove 50 pastureland+crop BANDENHE

126 MUHANIRA MUHANIRA UVE Kabasha Ngabo 85 pastureland+crop 127 KITONDO KITONDO GILWER Habarugira 290 pastureland+crop 128 LUMBICHI LUMBICHI GILWER Kanyanduki 167 pastureland+crop 129 KIROLIRWE KIROLIRWE AUGUSTE Karamuhetu 60 pastureland+crop CNKI

130 MBIZI MBIZI BLOCK Kaurwa 32 pastureland+crop CNKI

131 MBIZI MBIZI BLOCK Kinyakura 174 pastureland+crop CNKI

132 MBIZI MBIZI BLOCK Malira 64 pastureland+crop CNKI

133 MBIZI MBIZI BLOCK Muhima pastureland+crop CNKI

134 MBIZI MBIZI BLOCK Serenge 22 pastureland+crop CNKI

135 MBIZI MBIZI BLOCK Population 112 pastureland+crop CNKI

136 MBIZI MBIZI BLOCK Kasoza 98 pastureland+crop CNKI 137 KABATI KISUMA BLOCK Tukabintabu 95 pastureland+crop CNKI 138 KABATI KISUMA BLOCK Tukabintabu 16,1 pastureland+crop MmE

139 KATUHUNDA KATUHUNDA CORMANE Matabishi 63 pastureland 140 KATUHUNDA KATUHUNDA PATERROIL Matabishi 100 pastureland CNKI

141 MBIZI MBIZI BLOCK Nguba 14 pastureland 142 KABATI KISUMA DRIEX Pay Pay 109 pastureland 143 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA DRIEX Pay Pay 114 pastureland 144 RUVUNDA RUVUNDA JOSEPH Kamari 70 pastureland 145 RUSHENGO RUSHENGO BOLOGNE Muhambikwa 129 pastureland 146 RUVUNDA RUVUNDA MENAGER Kinangabo 71 pastureland

30 | P a g e

147 RUSHENGO II RUSHENGO II BOLOGNE Kulange 125 pastureland MEGNEGNI

148 RUVUNDA II RUVUNDA II NER Baziaka 55 pastureland

TOTAL MASISI 14390,35

31 | P a g e

III.3. COMMENTS ON THESE DATA.

3.1. General comments: The data presented reflects unease in the land management system in North Kivu province for several reasons. First, the inability of land services department to avail and update timely reliable data. Failure to manage real information on the ground concerning titles issued. The lack of willingness by land actors to facilitate the work of the land services department to have all the data. A weakness in the land services department to impose policies on various actors. Then, this problem gives rise to a number of hypotheses which must be clarified concerning the following issue: 1. Who profits from this disorderly situation? 2. Why are the interested parties not in a hurry to regularize neither to make known their rights on these when demanding their right of ownership? 3. Must we really think that these rights are not protected so much by the documents? 3.2. Specific comments. 3.2.1. According to the security documents, we realized that for those who have the documents or say those who availed the documents to us, the study found 7 types of documents namely: Certificate of ownership. Certificate of occupation. Allotment letter. Request for land. Certificate. Contract. Transfer certificate. If some are registered in the nomenclature of Congolese land legislation, others on the contrary find their value in the legitimacy finally there are others who would be qualified by documents delivered by anon competent authority. For legal documents, it should be noted: the certificate, the contract, the request for land. On the contrary the following documents are legitimate: transfer certificate, certificate of ownership, certificate of occupation and the allotment letter. 3.2.2. In relation to the high number of farms and plantations whose information was not available: It should be emphasized that the data are not available are concentrated in one group. These groups are MUTANDA BUKOMBO and BISHUSHA. Regarding the latter, a high density of conflict and insecurity due to land disputes not resolved by the courts should be noted. Added to this is the inability of successive authorities to resolve the conflict around the customary/traditional power that opposes the ruling families. We found ourselves in a situation, where the local land titles office refers to the provincial office while the latter refers to the office of the division of the territory that is supposed to manage this issue. The direct consequence is that the owners of these plantations are not only land insecure, but also the local people do not really know where to go when negotiating the rights to exploit these vast areas sometimes not entirely exploited. What is also true, the rightful owners of these plantations do not want most of times to put themselves to risk as belonging to one or another camp of the royal families in conflict.

32 | P a g e

It is very likely that the operations of land sales have taken place during the customary power struggles that led to land dispossession of many households of small producers.

3.2.3. CNKI blocks, or the National Committee of Kivu: Created in 1928 by the colonial power, CNKI distributed them to settles for agricultural exploitations or farms. These blocks have been grabbed by the ruling elite. The National Committee of Kivu had acquired during its creation « the monopoly of land management corresponding to the former Kivu district. Based on a survey work, the committee constituted “colonization blocks” (land considered suitable for agriculture and livestock sectors) which they hired to European settlers ». With the end of colonization, and with the new land law and nationalization followed by radical changes, the state has recovered these areas and distributed, to the dismay of local people, to some political elites obedient to Mobutu at that time. In fact, while the population, who had felt dispossessed of their land, thought they would recover land from the hands of settlers after independence and later with the drastic measures from the Mobutu regime. These large areas were simply taken over by private agricultural actors. We can mention that among these actors are politicians, economists and intellectuals. Only a block continues to be exploited by local people after many struggles that were sometimes bloody clashes in the region. This is KIPFUMU block in MASISI territory with an estimated area of 120 hectares. The current exploiters sometimes have titles that the relevant departments do not recognize but not according to the words of those responsible according to our meeting of 20 th February at the land titles office in Goma town. The concerned said that we must first of all exhaust the process of decommisioning in order to assign these lands to particular exploiters/operators. The head of works Fr X. SEBAKUNZI Ntibuka, in « the political dimension in land conflicts in the mountains of Kivu: conflicts between KALINDA and BUCYANAYANDI in MASISI territory » believes that CNKI was managing about 96732 ha or 967,32 Km2. He also says that « the settlers carve out large plantations and livestock farms (Nyabiondo: 2500ha, Loashi 1050 ha, Lubaya 2360ha…) from high value productive land taken away form the indigenous people. In total 15860 ha was taken over by plantations ». The difference between these data from C.T SEBAKUNZI and ours finds its explantation in the fact that some exploitors/operators know how to withdraw their transfer certificates from the liste of CNKI blocks by obtaining title deeds from various relevent authorities. The issue of management of CNKI recovery divide the actors in North Kivu province. On the one hand, the administration believes that under the law, all these blocks are incomes from state land. In addition, it was decided by the administration that CNKI has the monopoly to manage all these issues. Nevertheless, to be exploited by third parties, these blocks must first of all be regulated. Which did not seem to be the case for several among them.. On the other hand, the customary leaders continue to think that they must revover the lands which were taken from them by an arbitrary decision, with neither prior compensation nor consultation. Finally, the populations, through their organizations believe that these lands should be allocated to the local sorounding communities’ because they have less and less arable/cultivable land given the soaring population pressure. In total, about 13700 hectares are owned or better said «grabbed» by private actors mentionned above at the expense of the local populations as indicated in the table below:

IV. CNKI BLOCKS : NATIONAL COMMITTEE OF KIVU

33 | P a g e

Several land distributed by CNKI were owned by various actors. This was to the great shock of the local communities. The table below presents the situation of these lands just after recovery by the Congolese state.

Table n° ______LIST OF FARMS AND PLANTATIONS BELONGING TO CNKI BLOCKS

N° NAME OF THE LOCATION FORMER NEW OWNER TITLE TOT. S FARM/PLANT OWNER ARE M ATION A V LUBERO TERRITORY Farms and plantations Kambale 1 KANIERE KANIERE CNKI Katimba 360 80 LWANGONGO Parc 2 n°17 KAYNA CNKI Karushya 100 100 LWANGONGO Parc 3 n°15 KAYNA CNKI Karushya 102 102 LWANGONGO Parc 4 n°9 KAYNA CNKI Semakuba 100 70 LWANGONGO Parc Kahambu 5 n°19 KAYNA CNKI Kiluhu 100 90 LWANGONGO Parc Kambale 6 n°20 KAYNA CNKI Katehi 100 100 LWANGONGO Parc Kambale 7 n°16 KAYNA CNKI Muhindo 100 100 LWANGONGO Parc Paluku 8 n°21 KAYNA CNKI Kabunga 105 105 LWANGONGO Parc Paluku 9 n°18 KAYNA CNKI Kabunga 139 139 Kambale 10 KAHOHA KAHOHA CNKI Kihuhani 50 50 LWANGONGO Parc Muhindo 11 n°4 KAYNA CNKI Kyavakama 100 100 12. Komba Komba CNKI Pères 10 10 assomptionniste

13. Mahamba Q.Mahamba CNKI Pères 23 23 assomptionniste

14. Vutala Malende CNKI Diocèse de 180 180 ButemboBeni

15. ITAV Vutsundo CNKI Diocèse de 164 164 ButemboBeni

16. CEBCE Malende CNKI CEBCE 26 26

17. Bel air Cité de Butembo Ville de 22ha 22 Butembo

18. Hôpital de Katwa katwa CNKI CBACA 8ha 8

19. UCG Vutatimbwa CNKI Diocèse de 340ha 340 ButemboBeni

20. Kambali BUTEMBO CNKI Pères 5ha à 5 assomptionniste s

34 | P a g e

21. Léproserie Katwa CNKI CBCA 23ha 23

22. kirimavolo Katwa CNKI CBCA 9ha 9

23. Nzoli Kimbesa Mutanga CNKI NZOLI 196ha 196 KIMBESA

24. Paluku Lolwako kangote/Musit CNKI PALOS 13ha 13

25. Srs oblates de Passionnat CNKI Srs OBLATES 13ha 13 l’assomption

26. Kambale Kiputsu Kipese CNKI KIPUTSU 114ha 114

27. Paluku Lolwako Masereka CNKI PALOS 177ha 177

28. Paluku Mbumba Bukenye CNKI MBUMBA 51ha 51

29. Vighole Kavanda CNKI Tabu Bin 36ha 36 Witende

30. Kambale Katimba kimbulu CNKI KATIMBA 65ha 60

31 MBANGA kimbulu CNKI Kambale 70ha 70 Mbanga

32. Bloc Biena Masumko CNKI N.R. 95h N.R

33. Bloc Luhahi kimbulu CNKI N.R. 130ha N.R

34. Bloc Mutoto Lubero CNKI N.R. 170ha 120

35. Bloc kamaheri Kimbulu CNKI N.R. 85ha N.R

36. Bloc Lutembe Vusamba/ CNKI N.R. 45ha N.R Lutembe

37. Bloc Ngora Vsamba/Ngoro CNKI N.R. 75ha N.R

38. Bloc Kibirakoko vusamba vers CNKI N.R. 90ha 35 kasinga

39. Bloc kavare.. N.R. CNKI N.R. 60ha N.R

40. Bloc lubughe N.R. CNKI N.R. 175ha N.R

41. Bloc kaniangoko N.R. CNKI N.R. 95ha 46

42. Bloc Bisaravwe Visaravwe CNKI N.R. 60ha 56

43. Bloc kifuko cité Bapere CNKI N.R. 493ha N.R

44. Bloc Nyanya Bapere CNKI N.R. 466ha N.R

45. Bloc Kambala Bapere CNKI N.R. 473ha N.R

46. Bloc Mupanda Bapere CNKI N.R. 490ha N.R

47. Bloc Mandjinga Bapere CNKI N.R. 437ha N.R

35 | P a g e

48. Bloc Masisi Bapere CNKI N.R. 457ha N.R

49. Bloc Lendopolitiki Bapere CNKI N.R. 438ha N.R

50. Bloc Malunguna Bapere CNKI N.R. 403ha N.R

51. Bloc Kifuko Bapere CNKI N.R. 459ha N.R

52. Bloc Lonia Bapere CNKI N.R. 424 ha N.R

53. Bloc Kariere bapere CNKI N.R. 365ha N.R

54. Bloc Matadi Bapere CNKI N.R. 393ha N.R

55. Bloc Miere. Bapere CNKI N.R. 85ha N.R

56. Bloc Mamboa à à Wasa Mamboa CNKI N.R. 132ha N.R Lubero

57. Bloc colonial Mususa de CNKI Michels Ernest 22ha N.R kirimba Bukenie)

58. Bloc de colonisation Musasa Lubero CNKI N.R. 22ha N.R

59. Bloc vuhumbi Butembo buyora CNKI N.R. 22ha N.R

Mkambale 60. LUHAHI II LUHAHI CNKI Wasim 50 50 TOTAL CNKI BLOCK in LUBERO TERRITORY 9472 1193 BENI TERRITORY PLANTATIONS Mumbere 61. KONGOLI KIMA KONGOLI KIMA CNKI block Ndianabo 272 62. MANZAMUNDO MANZAMUNDO CNKI block Van Hoof Louis 84 84 63. KIBWE MADIWE CNKI block Van Hoof Louis 100 100 64. ALOYA MADIWE CNKI block Van Hoof Louis 90 90 65. MAMBENA MAMBENA CNKI block Kasereka Kasi 400 400 66. MANZAMUNDO MANZAMUNDO CNKI block Katembo Vuma 100 100 67. MALONDO MALONDO CNKI block Kayembe Manda 50 50 68. TABI TABI CNKI block Millor Roger 131 131 69. TABI TABI CNKI block Millor Roger 80 80 70. TABI TABI CNKI block Millor Roger 98 98 71. TABI TABI CNKI block Millor Roger 78 72. LUHULE MADIWE CNKI block Pick Bing Marc 125 73. LUHULE MADIWE CNKI block Pick Bing Marc 114 114 74. LUHULE MADIWE CNKI block Pick Bing Marc 100 100 75. TOTAL AREA FOR CNKI PLANTATIONS IN BENI TERRITORY 1822 FARMS 76. KASAMBIRI KASAMBIRI CNKI block Musungo 212 212 155, 77. BIAKOBE BIAKOBE CNKI block Mwenge Katungo 155,91 9 TOTAL AREA OF FARMS IN BENI TERRITORY 367,91 RUTSHURU TERRITORY PLANTATIONS 78. KIBUTUTU gpt Bukoma CNKI block Ruz Mr Remis 80
We did not find a farm which belonged to CNKI block MASISI TERRITORY PLANTATIONS 79 KIPFUMU Kipfumu CNKI block Bakungu Mayao 112 80 KIPFUMU Kipfumu CNKI block Bakungu Kalwy 112 81 NYANGE Nyange CNKI block Muhima 120 82 NGEREKO Ngereko CNKI block Baramisi

36 | P a g e

83 KIPFUMU Kipfumu CNKI block Population 120 TOTAL PLANTATIONS AREA IN MASISI 464 FARMS 84 MUFA MUFA CNKI BLOCK Ndakola 108 108 KABATI 85 KABATI KISUMA KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Bizima Kara 81 81 KABATI 86 KABATI KISUMA KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Bizima Kara 53 53 87 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE CNKI BLOCK Makabuza 129 88 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Tukabintabu 120 89 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Kakwene 120 90 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Kasoza 98 91 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Tukabintabu 95 95 92 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK 16,1 16,1 93 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Tukabintabu 34 34 94 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Tukabintabu 25 25 KABATI 95 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Safi 127 127 KABATI 96 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Makabuza 128 128 KABATI 97 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Makabuza 96 96 98 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE CNKI BLOCK Muhutu 30,7 30,7 99 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE CNKI BLOCK Naguru 50 50 1O0 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Serushago 62 62 101 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Mishiki 65 65 102 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Kashani 180 103 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Gakwene 55 104 NYABIONDO NYABIONDO CNKI BLOCK Shamamba 29 105 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE CNKI BLOCK Kamudoga 50 106 MURAMBI MURAMBI CNKI BLOCK Néo Apostolique 117 107 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE CNKI BLOCK Ritaganirwa 38 108 TSIRU MUFA TSIRU MUFA CNKI BLOCK Ndaalitsa 195 109 MURAMBI MURAMBI CNKI BLOCK Néo Apostolique 92 110 KAHASHA KAHASHA CNKI BLOCK Mutaka 222 111 KAHASHA KAHASHA CNKI BLOCK Mutaka 118 112 KAHASHA KAHASHA CNKI BLOCK Ndakola 111 113 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Bizima Karaha 148 114 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Kalinda 100 115 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Kalinda 50 116 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Kalinda 117 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Kalinda 118 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE CNKI BLOCK Ntakaziharo 39,5 119 KIFUMWE KIFUMWE CNKI BLOCK Ntakaziharo 31 120 MUHANGA MUHANGA CNKI BLOCK Ndakola 150 121 RUSIKA RUSIKA CNKI BLOCK Karuganda 80 80 122 LUSHEBERE LUSHEBERE CNKI BLOCK Ndakadayu 60 60 123 KIKOMA KIKOMA CNKI BLOCK Mulengezi 147 124 CHUNGO BLOC CHUNGO BLOC CNKI BLOCK Nkizingike 40 125 MUSHWA MUSHWA CNKI BLOCK Ruhinya 112 112 126 MUSHWA MUSHWA CNKI BLOCK Miburo 118 118 KABATI 127 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Miburo 98 98 KABATI 128 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Balinda 200 200 KABATI 129 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Kabanda 130 130 130 NYARUNABA NYARUNABA CNKI BLOCK Nguringoma 171,5 100 131 KABATI KABATI CNKI BLOCK Gasasita 400 370 132 KAHASHA KAHASHA CNKI BLOCK Ndakola 112 133 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Mbua 24 134 MUKOHWA MUKOHWA CNKI BLOCK Mastaki 50 135 LULAMBO LULAMBO CNKI BLOCK Karunganda 170 136 RUSIKA RUSIKA CNKI BLOCK Kaboyi 30 137 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Kaurwa 32 138 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Kinyakura 174 139 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Malira 64 140 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Muhima

37 | P a g e

141 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Serenge 22 142 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Population 112 143 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Kasoza 98 144 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Tukabintabu 95 145 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Tukabintabu 16,1 146 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Nguba 14 TOTAL FARM AREA 5476 TOTAL AREA OF CNKI BLOCK LAND GRABBED 17735

CNKI blocks of MASISI territory were in quasi totalilty grabbed by individuals and at the expense of traditional chiefs and local people. This behavior of land actors is explained by several researchers, as the fact that people taken as workforce would rather free themselves from the customary system of land management. In fact, so as not to continually depend on moods, tantrums and uncertainties of traditional leaders, actors prefer to seek land directly land from land administration. More still, the indigenous people are never in a hurry, at least in the last ten decades, to grant land use rights to those they call the intruders. Cfr MUGANGU .S.op cit.
On the other hand, the quasi totality, the CNKI blocks of Lubero territory in Bapere community, are neither informed nor operated on at least for the moment. This is due to the fact that the region has for a long time been isolated and since the departure of the settlers very few players/actors are really interested in this sector Bapere, which is also the largest in the territory of Lubero and having an area on its own of (8872km2), almost double the Masisi territory (4734) and slightly larger than the territory of Beni (7484). Bapere is the least populated in the territory and the second just after WALIKALE across the province in terms of low population density. The insecurity that has prevailed for long time in this forest region, the militias that are fighting the mining sectors, are the reason behind the land actors not being truly interested to grab land in these blocks and land that is generally not inhabited. The blocks of this region were famous for their mineral production. With the gradual establishment of peace in the region, it is feared that the miners of any kind can not rush to this "jungle" if appropriate measures are not taken to protect the indigenous people and conserve the ecosystem that the pygmies know how to safeguard to date. The negotiations that are ongoing between the Congolese government and the French company BOLORE to exploit these mineral regions are to be considered in the perspective of future land expropriation at the expense of local people. Our face to face meetings in PARIS with representatives of that big French company BOLORE have not produced results to verify this information and unfortunately the day’s government does not want to publish the contracts under negotiation or already signed contracts. In the same geographical light, in the territory of Beni, the collective sector of BeniMbau, in the BABILABAKAIKU locality, the company « CHRISTIAN LIFE WORLD MISSION FRONTIER » has just acquired a big transfer of about 1440 ha, after a lot of negotiations and complications from the political elite from the area. Despite the major sensitization of the customary chiefs by the civil society organizations and the opposition of some independent technicians for the purchase or say the sale of land by customary chiefs, they gave in to the temptation of money given to them. The civil society organizations, who were not opposed at all to the establishing of this American company through its Korean branch, proposed that indeginous land must be considered as their capital contribution in the company and would therefore become also shareholders of the company. Les responsables de cette société n’ont pas du tout accepté cette formule d’exploitation.

38 | P a g e

THE PROBLEM OF CREATING PARKS IN THE NORTH KIVU PROVINCE. The creation of parks in North Kivu province, in as much as it seemed not to have immediate visible consequences on the availability of land has become later on one of the causes of land conflicts in North Kivu, putting into consideration the area they occupy and the increasing population pressure in the region. Two parks were created in the province in 1925, for the VIRUNGA Park and in 1947 for the MAIKO Park respectively. The following table presents per territory the areas occupied by the parks.

Table n° _____. Area of parks per territory in North Kivu province.

N° Territory Total Park area % Observations area (Km2) VIRUNGA MAIKO 1. Rutshuru 5289 2846 0 53 2. Masisi 4.744 362 0 7 3. Walikale 23475 4. Nyiragongo 333 170 0 51 5. Lubero 18096 6. Beni 7484 3300 TOTAL 59.631 7900 AREA

Take note right away that these park areas are sometimes challenged by the parties for the people living along the river and the Congolese Institute for Conservation of Nature, ICCN, and the organization that manages parks in the DRC. However, these figures are relatively close to reality. We have several sources that give different figures especially in terms of Rutshuru territory.

As can be seen, the creation of parks also subtracted from the arable land of local communities, a large area that these communities continue to claim rightly or wrongly. As highlighted, Professor MUGANGU MATABARO "The creation of Virunga National Park had the effect over the same period not only of reducing the available land but also of displacing communities or parts of communities, placing them under the political and land dependence situation of the host communities "MUGANGU MATABARO S. The land crisis in eastern DRC; the African Great Lakes. 2007.2008 Directory, P.30 .

V. WAVE OF CREATION OF RESERVES AND TOWNS FROM LARGER CITIES OR TOWN ARES. Community Reserves: For many reasons and motivation various civil society actors and traditional leaders create in an accelerated manner forest reserves: Sometimes referred to as "protected area, sometimes community reserves," and this is a way of depriving the indigenous people cultivable land. A last attempt has been made by the provincial government to create new cities given their high concentration of people. A total of 17 new cities with about 1500 ha escape the customary management of land. The fierce opposition of traditional leaders against the project pushed this power to back down. But this is only a postponement. Rapid urbanization is the basis of the subtraction of land available for local communities and traditional leaders. The following table identifies the reserves and their respective areas in different territories of the province:

39 | P a g e

Table n°_____ Reserves and proctected areas in North Kivu province.

N° TERRITORY PROTECTED AREA OR AREA OBSERVATIONS RESERVE 1. Rutshuru 1. 2. 2. Masisi 3. Walikale 4. Nyiragongo 1. KIBUMBA : 1 2. BUHUMBA : 2 3. MUDJA : 1 4. KIBATI : 1

5. Lubero 1. TAYNA 2. KYAVIRIMU 3. 6. Beni 1. 2. 3. TOTAL AREA

VI. BIG TRANSACTIONS IN THE LAST TEN YEARS.

In this section we raise in particular the following points which were the subject of our investigations in the territories doing these investigations was possible: It should be noted that due to several factors including primarily insecurity, there have not been several cases of land grabbing by trans national organisations/companies. Indeed, they are not always in a hurry to invest in areas of insecurity such as eastern DRC However, a phenomenon has been observed since the country is experiencing some sort of peace. Local political actors are particularly interested in land for several reasons including:

1. Investing in land as a safe haven. Indeed, with continuing insecurity, the traditional business as is done in region that is to say "buying and selling" of goods imported as local sales, has high risk of looting. 2. Anticipation on the phenomenon "cargoode Map." Since the international community speaks a lot about cargoode, some players have expectation of a future market thus buying large land from the traditional leaders. 3. Some foreign companies have also gotten largescale acquisitions in anticipation of major agricultural, pastoral and mining activities. 4. Some took advantage of the various consecutive regimes in managing the province in order to own parcels of land in full contempt of the law.

Unfortunately several factors did not allow us to fully comprehend this phenomenon. 1. Our study, being very limited in terms of means and time, encountered sociopolitical, cultural and security obstacles.

40 | P a g e

2. Strategies to cover all operation transactions of selling and buying of land by various parties. Vendors generally, traditional leaders, do not want smallscale farmers to know that their land was sold by their leaders to third parties. The buyers in turn, do not want these operations are known so as to avoid both tax and reaction from framers whose land they paid for.

3. The pressure from the union and human rights organizations defending human rights that interfere with the actions of these as relates to the sale of land owned and operated by local communities. 4. Armed groups and militias also spearhead the ‘fight’ against land grabbing of ‘ancestral land’, by other parties at times by strangers with unknown motives. For all these reasons, there are certainly many cases of land transactions which took place but remain unknown by the administration and worse still by the people.

The study had responses and testimonies with respect to the following cases as having been subject to heavy land negotiations between several actors:

41 | P a g e

Table n°____Table of some cases that were subject of land transactions in North Kivu province from 2000 to 2010. 1. Masisi territory

42 | P a g e

FARM OR OWNER PLACE AREA TITLE AND PASTURELAND DURATION 01. BUBOGO Farm KAKIRA BUBOGO 120ha Permanent LEONIDAS 02. ISSABALUME Farm BALUME BUBOGO 50ha 25years 03. LUHONGA Farm SANDRO LUHONGA 352 Permanent 04. NDALAGA Farm COCOBU BUTARE 25years 05. NKIRANGANWA COCOBU BUTARE 300ha 25years Farm 06. RUJUGIRO Farm RUJUGIRO KILORIRWE 150ha 25years 07. KARAHA Farm KARAHA KILORIRWE 60ha 25years 08. MAJORO Farm MAJORO KILORIRWE 25years 09. MADAME MERLO MADAME KILORIRWE 3.000ha 25years Farms (all) MERLO BIBATAMA TEBERO 10. KAVEDO Farm KAVEDO KILORIRWE 150ha 25years 11. RUGABA Farm RUGABA KILORIRWE 25years 12. Goma diocese (all its DIOCESE 2049 25years farms and pastureland (parishes) 13. KIRIVITA Farm KIRIVITA NYABURA 260ha 25years 14. TEBERO Farm SEMANA TEBERO 60ha 25years 15. BAHATI Farm BAHATI TEBERO 25years 16. KABATI Farm MUNYARUGER KABATI 25years ERO 17. AMANI school LYCEE AMANI KABATI 25years 18. MUGUGU block MWESO 25years 19. BAHANI Farm BAHANI ROJEBESHI 25years 20. HERMAN Farm HERMAN BISEMBE 25years 21. RUHANA MIRI NDI RUHANAMIRE BURUNGU 62ha 25years Farm 22. KAMANZI Farm KAMANZI SAKE 25years 23. ZIMULINDA Farm VINCENT RUBAYA 25years ZIMUEL 24. INNOCENT Farm GAHIZI RUBAYA 25years INNOCENT

43 | P a g e

25. OSSO Farm BISENGIMANA OSSO 2.004ha 25years 26. NDAKOLA Farm NDAKOLA KATALE 1003 ha 25years 27. LOSHI Farm NGIRABATWA LUASHI 370 ha 25years RE 28. RWABAHENDA Farm RWABAHEND BURAMO 250ha 25years A 29. BITEGETSIMANA BITEGETSIMA BURAMO 210ha 25years Farm NA 30. RIGO Farm RIGO KISUMA N.R. 25years 31. SANGIRA Farm SANGIRA RUVUNDA N.R 25years 32. RWAGATI Farm RWAGATI RUVUNDA 105ha 25years 33. SAFI Farm SAFI ADILI NGUNGU N.R 25years 34. KASUKU Farms (All) KASUKU NGUNGU 1.850ha 25years NYABURA 35. GAHAMANYI Farm GAHAMANYI BURUNGU 55ha 25years 36. NDAYAMBAJE Farm NDAYAMBAJE NGUNGU 60ha 25years 37. MWINYANTORE RUTWE KIBABI N.R. 25years Farm 38. LUANDA Farm FRANCOIS KIBABI N.R 25years LUANDA 39. SENINGA Farm SENINGA KIBABI N.R 25years 40. OSWALD Farm MUKINGI KIBABI 155ha 25years 41. SERUFULI Farm SERUFILI KIRONKO N.R 25years 42. MOINES DE MOINES MOKOTO 300ha 25years MOKOTOS 43. KALINDA Farm FAMILLE BWEREMAN N.R 25years KALINDA A 44. Farm KIBIRA KIBIRA – LUSHANGI 65ha 25years THOMAS 45. LUSHANGI Farm KARGO LUSHANGI N.R 25years TWAGIRA 46. RUJUGIRO Farm RUJUGIRO KITCHANGA 250ha 25years 47. MADAME SENATA SENATA MUSHAKI 60ha 25years Farm 48. HESHIMA Farm HESHIMA MUSHAKI N.R 25years 49. DUNIA Farm DUNIA MUSHAKI 122ha 25years

44 | P a g e

50. RWUBAKA Farm RWUBAKA KATOYI 200ha 25years 51. HACERI Farm HACERI KATOYI 104ha 25years 52. BIGEMBE Farm BIGEMBE KATOYI N.R 25years 53. ZIMULINDA Farm ZIMULINDA KATOYI N.R 25years ANTHER 54. RUKAMATA Farm RUKAMATA KATOYI 305 ha 25years 55. MUPOROSO Farm MUPOROSO KATOYI 283ha 25years 56. SEREME Farm SEREME KAUSA 150ha 25years 57. KANYOVE Farm FAMILLE KAUSA 120ha 25years KANYOVE 58. UWIMANA Farm UWIMANA MAHANGA 205ha 25years 59. NGULU Farm KIZIMBA N.R 25years 60. MUUNABANDI block KIZIMBA N.R 25years TOTAL ESTIMATES FOR MASISI 14839 ie approxima tely 15000ha . Source: In charge of the MASISI land registry and 1 member of FEC.

2. RUTSHURU TERRITORY

45 | P a g e

Table n° ___ Listed cases in Rutshuru territory N° Name of Proprietor/Nationality Area Location or map Intended Consultation the expl goals undertakent with other actors 1 Domaine de MICHEL Baudouin/ 4326 ha BIRUMA, Production Contract with KATALE Belge KATAKE, and and the congo NYONGERA marketing of government good quality Use of local coffee labour/workforce Coffee exportation for industry agricultural research for introduction of new seed variety 2 Jardin BUCQUEY 2007 ha BUKOMBO/Bwito Production Idem teaicole de ACHIEL/Portu chieftancy and Ngeri gais marketing of (GTN) tea 3 Bertolé BERTOLE 200 ha KISHARU area Production Idem GERORGES/ and Polonais marketing of palm oil 4 Mangat MANGAT/ 250 ha KISHARU area Production Idem Indienne and exportation of palm oil 5 Liwali LIWALIWA/ 100 ha KAHUNGA Coffee Idem belge marketing

46 | P a g e

awareness creation on coffee production TOTAL IN RUTSHURU 6883

47 | P a g e

The cases noted in Rutshuru territory are not in themselves cases whose transactions were done in the last ten years. But given their extent or scope in the region, the populations think that they are recent cases which have had alot of consequences/effects on life and land security of the local communities. KATALE is the most talked about in the whole of Rutshuru territory. Table n°____ Cases identified in Butembo and Kayna. No Concessionnaires Area Geographic Take over situation date 1 KATINA MBAYAHI 4ha Witere in Lubero 01/04/2008 territory 2 KATEMBO 3ha Ndando 01/03/2008 MUTSUVA ABEL 3 CODEKI 14ha Kavali 11/01/2008 Musienene 4 KATEMBO 7ha Masuli 29/09/2007 KATALIVWA Daniel 5 MBUSA KAYUMBU 6ha Vuliki 11/09/2007 6 KISONI KAMBALE 29ha Lubero 01/09/2006 Sem 7 MBOKANI KASAYI 23ha Lubero 1/10/2006 8 Compagnie de Marie 94ha Lubero 01/07/2003 notre dame 9 MASTAKI 65ha Kivira Butembo 02/08/2007 KALAMBIRE 10 MAUNGA KIMBUTE 12ha Katolo 01/07/2007 Musienene 11 MAUNGA BATEMA 17ha Musienene 01/07/2007 13 KATSONGO 16ha KasituKinane 01/09/2006 MUKONDA 14 PALUKU 7ha Mwenga 01/09/2006 MUHONGYA Kasinga 15 KATSONGO 18ha Isale 01/08/2006 MUKONDA 16 KAMBALE VISO 133ha Lubero territory 14/06/2002 17 MUMBERE MUHESI 26ha Ngombe 01/07/2003 TELESPHORE vwandaghala 18 KASEREKA 90ha Mwenye Masehe 01/10/2003 KATEMBO 19 KAMBALE 33ha Lubero area 01/05/2001 VIKALWE 20 KATEMBO 148ha mukonze 01/08/2001 KAHEHERO 21 KATEMBO 17ha Vukenge II 01/08/2001 KAHEHERO 22 KATEMBO 85ha Lubero territory 01/08/2001 KAHEHERO 23 KATEMBO 87ha Lubero territory 01/08/2001 KAHEHERO 24 KATEMBO 886ha Lubero territory 01/08/2001 KAHEHERO

48 | P a g e

25 MASIKA KAVALAMI 56ha Lubero territory 01/08/2001 26 KAMBALE 204ha Lubero area 01/02/2004 SIRHAKYAVHU 27 KATEMBO 156ha MusingiLwero 01/02/2004 SYASIMWA 28 NDUNGO 46ha Luongo 01/08/2003 MANZEKELE 29 KAHINDO 60ha Kyangwali 01/07/2003 WASUKUNDI Lubero Mwenye Lubero 30 Communauté baptiste Katwa 01/02/2003 au centre de l’Afrique CBCA 31 ISENGINGO 84ha Biena Lubero 03/10/2005 KAMBERE NGISE 32 KAKULE SIRIWAYO 34ha Munoli chefferie 01/7/2005 de baswagha 33 Famille NZOLI 196ha Mutanga Lubero 09/05/2005 KIMBESA 34 KATSUVA 21ha lubero 15/04/2005 MUGHANDA 35 Université adventiste de 39ha Lukanga Lubero 15/06/2005 Lukanga 36 MWAHULWA 150ha Luofu Lubero 17/06/2004 KILIBA DAVID 37 SIVIKWA 94ha Q.Matembe, cel 01/05/2004 MWENGESYALI Vusesa Butembo 38 MUHINDO KOMBI 19ha Luumishwa 10/05/2000 Bbo town 39 Communauté baptiste 10ha Institut Katwa vutamirie 01/12/2000 au centre de l’Afrique biblique de CBCA Katwa 40 KATEMBO KISOLU 45ha Kasugho Lubero territory 01/11/2003 41 KAMBALE 10ha Lubero kavale 01/03/2000 MUKEMBA Kyabwe 42 KATEMBO BANGA 103ha Kirunggwe/Musindi 01/10/2002 43 MUHINDO 10ha Mighobwe Mighobwe factory 01/11/2002 VANGANAYIRIRE DAMIEN 44 Diocèse de Butembo 38ha Bbo Molongo hill 01/10/2002 Beni 45 KAMBALE 44ha Mulongo/Kiragho 01/10/2002 MAKAKALO 46 KATEMBO 247ha Kirungwe 01/08/2002 MBANGA 47 KAMBALE 164ha Lubero Kyavirimu /Lutambi 01/09/2000 NDAGHALA 48 Mission évangélique 43ha Lubero Kyavirimu /Lutambi 01/09/2000 des adventistes du 7 e jour 49 KATSONGO 136ha Mutundu 01/05/2000 MUKONDA 50 SIVIKA 45ha Vusala Busesa 01/05/2000 MWENGESYALI

49 | P a g e

51 KAMBERE 66ha BwambeBusengwa 09/01/2001 KIPUTSU 52 KAMBALE 63ha BP313 Bbo Batangi 12/04/2000 SAASITA 53 Diocese de butembo 68ha BP179Bbo Itundi 12/04/2000 Beni Biongwe 54 KATEMBO kasugho Lubero territory 01/11/2003 KISOLU 45ha TOTAL LAND IN 4120 BUTEMBO AND KAYNA Some comments: For the areas cited above, we found out that an area of about 26000 ha was subject of transaction. Once again, the territory of MASISI is leading with more than half of land sold, registered and regularized of 15000 ha. We must establish the correlation between the good representation of this territory in the different different successive rebellions in the North province and the willingness to grab land while taking advantage of all situations which are presents in order to reinforce land security when they are in power. If this correlation is established, we can very easily affirm that the land conflicts are also among the causes of persistent wars and land insecurity in the North Kivu province. Several people met during our investigations only wished that the transactions that have taken place during the war period must be revisited given the circumstances in which they took place.

50 | P a g e

VII. MOTIVATIONS OF ACTORS INVOLVED IN LAND GRABBING. The actors have different and diversified motivating factors behind land grabbing. The following table recapitulates these different motivations by actors.

TABLE N°______: SUMMARY OF MOTIVATION ELEMENTS OF DIFFERENT ACTORS INVOLVED IN THE PROCESS OF LAND GRABBING. N° ACTORS MOTIVATIONS IMPLICATIONS ON LOCAL OBSERVATIONS. COMMUNITIES POSITIVE NEGATIVE 1. The Attract foreign investers Make profitable land Expropriation of Emergence of landless communities in certain government for capital fees/income. poorly exploited. local populations. districts (Masisi and Rutshuru). (National and Increase in number of armed groups and militias provincial) for selfdefence. Create employment for A non qualified, Poor Its only the processing factories that employ the population. poorly remunerated proletarianization some workers. workforc by some big of the population. Agricultural entreprises prefer haveing exploiting entrepreneurs who Rusthuru case. their transfers through local populations continue to exploit land sometimes on payment of some royalty or by despite the crisis and working at the same time on their perenial crops insecurity. destined for exportation. Give value to natural Development of local Making poor The poor farmers are tempted by money and resources which are community land local from the pressure of needs they are sometimes insufficient and not Selling and communities. forcedto sell their land for those without other exploited speculation around rural Progressive sources of income. land (More negative acquisition of land than positive) by a certain category (elites, politicians and intellectuals) and

51 | P a g e

foreign enterprises. 2. Foreign Access cheap land. Expropriation of Weak capacities of receiving countries to enterprises land. valuably negotiate with the foreing entreprises. Take advantage of the Cration of a workforce The unionization is very weak and chronique facilities offered by the classe poorly paid anda joblessness weakens the employees from any receiving country t the mercy of the claim. See reserves on job market. (taxation, procedures and enterprises; judicial security…) Invest in a Accumulation of These factors well marked in Rutshuru territy promising/rich sector unexploited land and a part of Beni terrirory. belonging to farmers. Produce with minimum Sometimes the Food insecurity Very few are in the food crop production and they cost for exportation opening up of areas, since the insufficiently produce them alongside the export acces to basic social production is crops. infrastructure : health mainly for Unfulfiled promises by the entrepreneurs. centres, schools … exportation coffee, papaine, cocoa, quinquina, palm oil… 3. Acquirers Invest in a promising Constitution of land Accumulation of Acquisitions sometimes fraudulently of land sector reserves in certain unexploited land while manipulating law especiallcy around the areas. alongside farmer settler transfers and the CNKI transfer. land. Difficult acces to land by local communities. Local culture of Taking away of Poor exploitation or lack of exploitation of good presitge investment large tracts of land at the expense of the local communitites. especially on extensive arable land from land for livestock rearing. local populations.

52 | P a g e

4. Local elites Valeur réfuge Accumulation of Strong commercialization of land excludes the insufficient and vulnerabe and the poor in the competition. unexploited land Anticiper sur un marché Difficult acces to Potential risks in reoccurence of conflicts porteur biocarburant, land by the emanating from the ever growing market for land carte de cargoodne vulnerable and renegotiating sale contracts by the future populations and generations of the present sellers, from where we driving them have resurgence of conflicts. Case of MASISI and away. LUBERO. 5. Traditional The taste of luxury and Expropriation of The functionning, lack of accessibility and leaders/custom easy way of becoming land sometimes complexity of the congolese judicial system offers ary chiefs ; rich. exploited by the vey little opportunities for reclamation for farmers. smallscale farmers. Sometimes getting rid Expropriation of Big entrepreneurs lust for land in conflict since of land under conflict. farmers’ land. they are very cheap. Sometimes the administration and judicial officers amplify conflcts since they are the first beneficiairis in cases of land conflicts. Customary power made In certain cases, the Suspicion visà Tendency of going back to the administration fragile emancipation of vis customary despite its weaknesses especially those who have populations under the power. money to pay for the services. customary judgements.

53 | P a g e

VIII. LAND LEGISLATION IN THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO AND ITS IMPLICATIONS ON FARMER LAND IN NORTH KIVU PROVINCE. In this section, we are not presenting the shortcomings of the land law but rather to highlighting its limits in order to consider the priority actions and strategies for the managers and leaders of EAFF as well as of other actors involved in land. There already exists abundant literature on this theme. We will limit ourselves here to the salient aspects and try to complement these elements with new elements that should be noted with the adoption by the Congolese National Assembly on land in the "Law on the Basic Principles of agriculture" in this month of May 2011. We note immediately that this law will wait until its promulgation by the President of the Republic and will only take effect six months after its promulgation, refer to article 86 of the said law. We thought worthwhile to make reference to a study we conducted in the month July 2009 in the activity building program FAT, a study undertaken in collaboration with GRET, Group for Research and Technological Exchange, the Forum of Friends of FAT Earth and the CCFD Catholic Committee against Hunger and for Development. Being in the coordinating team of this study, it allows us to take the elements identified by it to this point. These elements are still relevant in the extent that we do not have any more that is recent that would contradict them. However, we felt as mentioned above that we should integrate the new agricultural law which has just been adopted. We will also make reference to the code of good conduct of chiefs which is being debated in the provincial assembly in North Kivu, even if it is not yet adopted by the provincial legislature. It has already passed the debate, what remains is the adoption article by article before being passed and promulgated by the provincial governor. The analysis of land management system will enable us to identify the various obstacles encountered by the smallscale producer against other players land. It may also identify gaps and elements that facilitate land ownership phenomenon and massive concentration of land by largescale farmers at the expense of smallscale farmers in North Kivu province.

VIII.1. The position of two land management systems

1.1. Complex and unenforced laws Land legislation, despite the promulgation of the various sections, has changed little since the last thirty (30) years.

54 | P a g e

It currently represents a bottleneck on the one hand to the resolution and conflict prevention and on the other hand to the development of the country.

The historical development of land legislation/law Land legislation of the DRC has been defined by a series of successive pieces of legislation; the most critical are those of 1966, 1971, 1973, 1980. They highly affirmed the property ownership of the state lands, while ensuring the security of property rights assigned to persons (physically or morally) in the form of concessions, more or less durable or even perpetual.1 » The colonial period and private ownership Before independence, the colonial state had all rights on "Belgian Congo" land and the issue of land and property is governed by the provisions of Book II of the Belgian Civil Code which enshrines in particular the private ownership of land. Two orders (from 30 September 1922 and May 31, 1934) establish the procedure to be followed before any disposal (transfer act involving the property 2) or lease of land (transfer act involving the right of use). These two ways of access to property was carried on public lands and were granted according to the districts and the size of funds involved or by the King of Belgium or by provincial governors, or by custodian of title deeds. The procedure was "to find vacant land required for transfer or lease and the nature and extent of rights that the local community could have on these lands." From the onset until its conclusion, this study involved the political, administrative customary and legal authorities. So there was at that time legal measures which would be used to enforce occupancy rights of "indigenous people" and to organize a system of ownership in their favour. However, although this was supposed to protect the rights of the population this was rarely respected. « Thus, for the lands under their management, administrative authorities were issuing various titles either to have right of property for funds or building or to prove the transfer of use of such property. Among these titles, there were certificates of registration and landlord’s book. In addition, it was possible to obtain on the land occupied by local communities use rights from the leaders of these communities, and that, following a contract of sale for a consideration or for free» 3. In Kivu, we have seen this in a previous chapter; the monopoly of land management is assigned to the National Committee of Kivu (CNKI). And therefore during independence, four types of land were recognized: o « 1 ° indigenous lands governed by customs and local practices; o 2 ° registered land governed by Book II of the Belgian Civil Code ; o 3 ° lands occupied in native towns and non-traditional centres governed by local administrative law ; o 4 ° vacant land 4. » Post-colonial period

1 MATHIEU P., MAFIKIRI TSONGO A., op. cit. 2 MALERE MUDEKEREZA, G., La problématique de la survivance des anciens titres de propriété foncière et immobilière en droit congolais, RCN Justice et démocratie Bulletin n ° 27 Premier trimestre 2009, Droit Foncier 3 BUCYALIMWE MARARO, S., Pouvoirs, élevage bovin et la question foncière au NordKivu, Anvers, 2001, p.31 4 PALUKU KITAKYA, A. Interactions entre la gestion foncière et l’économie locale en région de Butembo, Nord Kivu, République Démocratique du Congo, Thèse de doctorat, LouvainlaNeuve, 2007, p. 289 55 | P a g e

Between 1960 and 1966, the new independent state initially got tin its account existing land legislation according to which land acquired privately is outside the jurisdiction of the state. So in Kivu management of land rights, forestry and mining is transferred to the BelgiumAfrican of Kivu (SOBAKI) thus excluding the Congolese state. o 1966: The Congolese government puts an end to a colonial land laws. By OrdinanceLaw No. 66343 of 7 June 1966, named "Bakajika law," the Republic of Congo (Zaire) takes over all land, forestry and mining rights granted or assigned during colonization. o 1971: two laws (Law No. 71008 and No. 71009 of 31 December 1971) containing the amendment the Constitution, states (Article 10) that "the soil and under soil/underground of Zaire and their natural products belong to State ". o 1973: Law No. 73021 of 20 July 1973 on the general property, real estate and land tenure and security regime is adopted. It reaffirms the principle in 1966 according to which "the ground is wholly owned and inalienable by the State" (Art. 53), which only grants the participating rights in the form of concessions to individuals physically or morally 5. o 1980: in the middle of "making of Zaire" the Law No. 80008 of 18 July 1980 amends and supplements Law No. 73021 which focuses on the transformation in perpetuating all rights to land acquired by "Zairians” before 1980. "Any right to own land that was acquired regularly by Zairians, individuals, before the entry into force of this Act, is converted, provided that it has been materialized by valorization which complies with laws and regulations in a perpetual franchise fee [...] "(Article 4 amending Article 369 of Law No. 73021).

Law No. 73021 of 20 July 1973 on the general property, land tenure and property security regime is considered the fundamental text of land legislation in the DRC. To date, all the texts supplementing Law No. 73021 are the Land Code of the DRC. They are published in the special issue of the Official Journal of 5 April 2006 6. VIII.2: FUNDAMENTAL LEGISLATION ON FARMING .

Fundamental legislation on farming aims at formulating policies concerning acquisition and distribution of farming land, cessation of land ownership rights and ways of resolving conflicts arising from land ownership. All these issues are covered in chapter two of this new law on farming. We examine various policy issues as adopted by the National Assembly during the ordinary session of March, 2011 dated 4 / May / 2011.

Section 1: Distribution of farming land

Article 23 Farming land is granted to farmers as specified in the law on land distribution and ownership. Article 24 The farming contract determines the types of crops to be grown by the concessionaire.

5 MAFIKIRI TSONGO A., op.cit. , in De VILLERS G. (dir.), Phénomènes informels et dynamiques croplles en Afrique , Cahiers africains/Africa studieux , n°1920, 1996, pp.4662. 6 Journal Officiel de la RDC, Code foncier, n° spécial, 5 avril 2006, p. 24. 56 | P a g e

It also determines the minimum production levels to be attained by the farmer. Article 25 Rights on the acquired farming land by virtue of usage are exercised in accordance with the law. The local communities practice farming activities, pasture growing and leaving it fallow. Section 2: Cessation of land rights Article 28 Farming concessions are transferable in accordance with the law. Section 3: Land leasing Article 29 According to the present legislation, land leasing is governed by the common law. Article 30 The farming concessionaire has the right to rent at least two thirds of his concession to another party. The concessionaire must notify the local administration of this step. The concessionaire together with the tenant takes full responsibility for this process and is answerable to the state for the signed obligations in the farming contract. For this case, concession can be either be the object of land lease or lease with tenant farming, and should conform to the law and state land lease regulations. Article 31 When the farming concession is rent out, the tenant benefits from the right of preemption in case of cessation provided he has a not emphasized the agricultural concession. Section 4: Agricultural land conflicts Article 32 Conflicts arising from ownership of agricultural land of the local communities can only be addressed by judicial authorities if they were subjected beforehand to the conciliation procedure, on the initiative of one of the parties before the provincial advisory organ or that of decentralized territorial entity envisaged in article 4(15). Article 33 The reconciliation procedure breaks the limitation period envisaged in the common law from the reception of the request for reconciliation by the provincial advisory organ or that of a decentralized territorial entity envisaged in article 4 (15). In case reconciliation does not take place, the case is brought, by the active party, to the hearing of a more competent jurisdiction within three months from the reception of a verbal trial of nonreconciliation. This same law also envisages in article 17 that nothing should be expropriated by lands acquired on the basis of the law or taken advantage of on the basis of public interest. These different dispositions are, to a large extent, likely to complete and improve the land system in force in DRC. .

VIII.3. LEGISLATION GOVERNING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE CUSTOMARY LEADERS AND THE FARMERS IN THE NORTHERN PROVINCE OF KIVU

At provincial level, another initiative of law, popularly known as ‘a decree’ is being discussed in northern Kivu province assembly. This decree initiated by the Forum des Amis de la Terre (F.A.T) is an experimental project driven by the customary leaders in land management. On the whole, the following dispositions are to take into account the security of the small farmers

57 | P a g e and apply to the customary leaders, land owners, agrarian farmers and other participants in the agricultural sector. It also highlights the rights and duties of customary leaders, land owners, farmers and the administrative systems. Article 9 stipulates this ‘The customary leaders have the right to participate in preliminary enquiries of the envisaged concession articles 193 203 of law N º 73/021 of July 20th, 1973 as changed this day’. For the duties of the customary leaders, article 19 highlights what follows: ‘In case it proved that the landowning leader is involved in either way, closely or from a distance, directly or indirectly with the reasons of the conflict which drove led to the commotion, the losing party and/or if need be, both parties lodge a complaint before competent judicial organs’. The losing party has the right to an equivalent indemnity as the landowning leader. It is illegal for land owning leaders to sell the already allocated land. The ultimate initiative of land sale must come from the farmer and the landowning leader (Art 32). The biggest feature and innovation to be acknowledged in this legislation is the clear place of women as far as the land question is concerned. In fact, in article 22, it is recorded: ‘Customary leaders must enforce the law that discourages them and others from practicing any discriminating tendencies which prevent women from owning natural resources especially land. Consequently, these leaders should put in place measures that will facilitate land ownership by women achieve.’ As can be seen, DRC already has a juridical mechanism which should be known, understood and taken advantage of/exploited.

VIII.4.THE CHARACTERISTICS OF LAND SYSTEM IN FORCE

The Land Code published in the Official Gazette in April 2006 is a document of 99 pages. Law No. 73021, which alone has 399 articles, is a procedural document and complex. The land tenure system is characterized as follows: The State is the sole owner of all land. The state nationalized “made public” all lands including the socalled "indigenous land". Article 387 in fact defines that "the land occupied by local communities become from the entry into force of this Act, public lands." Land property no longer exists: the land rights granted by the State to individuals in the form of concessions are rights of use. The granting of the latter is subject to the development of land, according to those rights. Thus, as explained by Professor Rochegude, in the Congolese land system there is no "opposition between public law and land right”. What exists is "only one category, public lands, which provides access to land rights which are never property in the civil sense" 7. Besides this, the issue of customary rights remains omnipresent. The state land which consists of public lands includes a public and a private domain. The public domain " consists of all land for public use or service " (Art. 55): bed of lakes, rivers, waters, etc . The private domain is composed of " all other lands " outside the public domain. The rights of use of such land shall be granted to either public or private persons with a certificate of registration which serves as the basis for the establishment of a perpetual, ordinary or service lease. The free concession or concession without charges is " the contract by which the state recognizes a community, a physical or moral individual with public or private right, rights of

7 ROCHEGUDE, A., PLANCON, C., « Décentralisation, acteurs locaux et foncier », Fiche pays : République Démocratique du Congo, Comité Technique foncier et développement, 2009, p.15. 58 | P a g e use " (Article 61). The conditions for awarding concessions vary according to (1) the land size requested for and (2) to whether they are rural or urban (that is to say included in the of an entity declared urban) 8. Law No. 73021 specifies the procedures for awarding concessions: the awarding of a concession is subject to an investigation commonly called. "Vacant land survey" designed to "ascertain the nature and extent of the rights that third parties could have on land under request for concession " (Article 193). It includes: " no 1: On-site verification of the delimitation of the land requested, [...] no 4: the hearing of those voice their complaints or comments/demands verbally, [...] " (Art 194). This investigation is "conducted by the Commissioner of area or by an officer or civil servant in the Commissioner office" in the rural area and this is the "agricultural officer" who undertakes the investigation. “The lands that are part of the private domain of the state are urban or rural" (Art. 60). Urban farms such as described in Act No. 73021 located in the urban constituencies; Rural land is the “remaining” land after subtraction of urban land. They are: o lands granted, o Land allocated to the public domain o land occupied by local communities. Confusion relating to customary rights:

One of the main sources of confusion induced by Act No. 73021 addresses the "customary law" and the conditions on which to base a concession right. Indeed, the land occupied and used by local communities " individually or collectively, in accordance with local customs and practices " (Art. 388) are in the private domain of the State. In addition, " The rights of use lawfully acquired on these lands will be regulated by an Order of the President of the Republic " (Art. 389). This ordinance was never enacted and has therefore, left the customary land rights in a state of confusion and uncertainty. Thus, On one hand, the law removes the management of land from the traditional authorities. Secondly, the lack of an order of the President of the Republic suggests that the land occupied "in accordance with local customs and practices" still fall within the customary law. For Professor Mugangu Matabaro, the ambiguity of customary rights is threefold : 1. in the legal regime of the land, that is to say the rules applicable to these lands, 2. level of management authority, 3. at the nature of the rights of farmers. . » In fact, to Matthew Paul, the " legal loophole " makes the customary rights " vulnerable compared to other rights (mainly the concessions granted to private individuals) whose procedures and written sureties are explicitly defined ». Procedures not followed The procedure for granting a concession is long, complex and subject to corruption. The most fundamental point of the procedure for consideration and respect for customary rights is unfortunately one that is often sloppy. This is the "initial inquiry into the concession." It is common to have false inquiries undertaken with or without complicity by the customary or administrative authorities.

8 ROCHEGUDE, A., PLANCON, C., op. cit. 59 | P a g e

The modalities/procedures for awarding concessions are a favorable ground for all kinds of manipulations. In fact according to the size and location of land applied for, the competent authorities are not the same (see table below). In practice, sometimes concessions covering large areas are granted from the capital without informing the populations and less still calling for enquiries to find out if the land is vacant. .

Competent Authority Acreage granted Rural lands Urban lands Parliament ≥ 2000 ha ≥ 100 ha President of the Republic > 1000 ha et < 2000 ha > 50 ha et < 100 ha Ministry of Land Affaires > 200 ha et ≥ 1000 ha > 10 ha et ≤50 ha Governor of the Province ≤ 200 ha ≤ 10 ha Conservator of Land Titles < 10 ha <50 a Similarly, occupants not aware of the applications for concessions by a third party can not assert their right in period of two (2) years allotted for this purpose. After two years, the certificate of registration becomes unassailable. "The actions against him are pitiful, even if it is received by mistake, surprise or fraud 9 ». Obviously these actions are often lengthy and costly and are rarely accessible to the occupants.

Even beyond violations of the law, conducting inquiries in rural areas pose real technical problems because on the one hand, of the vast area of land and secondly, the lack of qualified persons to undertake this.

Confusion on the "survival" of ancient title deeds and documents issued by third parties If the Act provides for the conversion, in perpetuity, the land rights legally obtained before 1980, in practice, users continue to produce old documents to try to justify their right to occupy land or a house. This is the landlord book, the land form, the allotment certificate, the certificate of right of occupation or even the sale agreement from a traditional chief. Yet according to article 390 of Law No. 73021 " From the commencement of this Act," the right of occupancy "found by" the landlord’s book "or equivalent to a title issued in a town or area of the Republic is abolished. "

Thus, only the landlord books and other documents before the entry into force of the Land Act are eligible for access to the right in perpetuity. The documents issued after that date by the registrar of real estate properties do not in principle have legal value.

However, as explained by Professor Mugangu Matabaro, " these provisions are often ignored by the land authorities as well as the local territorial authorities (Mayors, territorial administrators, leaders, chiefs of sectors, groups, localities), which, according to practice, "regulate" contradicting situations to the law or simply attribute without having knowledge issue titles of land" (fragmented records)».

9 MUGANGU MATABARO S., op. cit., p. 30. 60 | P a g e

Lack of systematic conversion of the old land titles (those prior to 1973), without training nor awareness, often illinformed users are vulnerable: they hide behind documents that do not or no longer secure them.

The range of codes

Parallel to the Land Code, there is a DRC Mining Code and a Forest Code, each having a different a register. These complex codes also fall sometimes in competition with the land tenure system. The Mining Code was established by the Act No. 007/2002 of 11 July 2002, and specified by the Implementing Decree No. 038/2003 of 26 March 2003, with mining regulations. According to the Mining Code, the State owns the minerals both on the earth surface and under the earth surface. It states among other things that rights under a mining concession are distinct from those of a land concession. o It is a matter of different allusions to private property even though it is non existent in Law No. 73021. It is in fact a matter in Article 132 of the "owner of land." o Access to mineral resources is subject to the prior consent of the "owner" or legal occupier. Once established, " the owner or lessee is, expected to repair the damages caused by the work, and even authorized, to perform as part of his mining activities " (Art. 280). Similarly, if the land is rendered unfit for culture, the "rights holders" of land must be compensated. o In case of dispute, the Mining Code provides for the settlement " by all non- judicial remedies, including transaction, compromise, and arbitration or before a judicial police officer or a public officer ». As is the case for land code, procedures to recognize the rights of local populations which therefore hinder the granting of mining concessions are rarely implemented. Beyond the manipulation, identification of rights holders is difficult because (1) they generally have no document to assert their rights and (2) the mining sites are often remote enclosed areas where there social structure is not well elaborated and hence where traditional authorities are less present. As a result, and in practice, persons granted a mining concession on lands not subject to any registration with the land administration see their rights as secure. This is why the people believe that mining legislation prevails over land rights.

The Forest Code was established by Law No. 011/2002 of 29 August 2002 and supplemented by various implementing regulations put together in a special issue of the Official Gazette of November 6, 2002. According to the Forest Code, " forests are the property of the State " (Art. 7). o Forests are in three categories:  classified forests in the public domain of the State;  protected forests (not classified) in the private domain of the State and may be subject to concessions excluding any real right in land ;  forests for permanent production. o Local communities can obtain a concession or part of protected forest in areas "lawfully possessed under the custom " (Article 22)

61 | P a g e

o "The natural or planted forests included in land granted under the land laws belong to their dealers. - The rights to these forests are exercised in compliance with the provisions of this Act and its implementing measures "(Article.8) The classification of forests is done by the Ministry of Environment, Nature Conservation and Tourism. Local communities occupying the forests are often classified in a certain class in the capital. They are victims of the myth that "forests are empty."

VIII.5. THE CHANGING PRACTICES AND CUSTOMS

A number of land conflicts in the DRC and Kivu are related to (1) the ignorance of local customs or lack of consideration of these customs in policies and (2) to customary changes which have occurred in history. Customs have changed; traditional authorities have acquired new powers which have all contributed to social change particularly in the rural areas.

The different visions of the land as the origin of conflicts The different visions of the land of the actors in Congo explains in part the land conflicts. There are: (1) An opposition between the “customary” vision and the “civil” vision of land . In Congo generally, the civil notions of « private property », of « vacant land and without owners » introduced by the colonizer is opposed to as compared to the customary vision in which land belongs to the community. (2) An opposition between the indeginous peoples vision and that of the migrant populations. In Kivu in particular the different visions identified different strategies of access to land. For indigenous people in Kivu, " the sense of territory is defined by the relationship between ethnicity, authority (tribal chief) and a portion of space. Access to land is inseparable from the participation in a network of social relations. " In receiving land, beneficiary person is subject to obligations of loyalty embodied by various tributes and levies and the provision of services to traditional authorities.

For migrant populations, including the Banyarwanda, land is an object of individual development devoid of personal relationships. o In Kivu, the nonrecognition by the migrants of social dependency on traditional leaders has been a source of indigenous land disputes in the fifties. In a simplified way, migrants do not consider themselves as belonging to the local community (and/or is not considered by the natives as their own) did not recognize customary authority and thus free from all responsibility and loyalty to them. o The need for social independence visàvis the indigenous chiefs will lead some migrants, legitimate or not, to use land law to access to land. According to this legislation, the piece of titled land is out of the jurisdiction of chiefs. The holder of the property doesn’t have recognition or responsibility towards the traditional authorities. And we must remember that they obtain titles in order to escape the authority of traditional leaders in land matters. Refer to

62 | P a g e

table number; CNKI block already presented and the table on lands that are object of transactions for the 2000 2010 period. Land is not seen in the same way by all the actors. This is why, in terms of these visions, the actors will base themselves on different strategies in order to access land. • For some, land is not an independent object, but constitutes an inseparable object from the relation with the community. The management of use rights which apply to these land is done by the customary authorities. Land doesn’t belong to one person and is not subject for sale. With this vision, the actors access use rights vie customary procedures. • For others, land is a stand alone object, clearly distinct from social considerations (always contradicting) and destined for valorization. Land is an object for sale and could actually be bought or sold. With this vision, actors are distant from social customary considerations while accessing land privately and use rights through the land legislation/law. With history and together with current realities, these differing perceptions on land are opposing and are a source of land conflicts in the DRC.

Local community land practices in North Kivu The local indeginous populations are mainly from Nande, Nyanga, Tembo and Hunde tribes. In the customary land design notably of the Nande, land belongs to the whole community and territory management is done by royal families at the clan or supraclan level 10 . The socio political power ( Vwami ) is held by a triumvirat composed of a religious chief ( Mukulu ), a political chief ( Mwami ), and a military chief ( Ngabwe ) all belonging to the same fratrie and the land power is on the religious chief, le mukulu and other different land chiefs ( Bakama ). The Bakamas are descendants of «recognized families established long time ago in the country who are believed to be the first occupants of the land, during the very first migration » they « are members of Mwami lineage who have acquired customarily specific land prerogatives ». «It is them who redistribute land to other members of the community ». Communities therefore access land use rights according to the principles of a society lineae: from father to son. Women are excluded from land inheritance. One of the reasons given is that women are married and would transfer land rights to her husband and hence to another family. For different reasons (economic, social and political), in selling land, the customary authorities (whether one of the members of truimvirat or Bakama) have contributed to the questioning of the customary practice and therefore has been a source, historically, of land conflicts. With their role, whether known or not, it is difficult to identify exactly who, in the customary power organization made decisions which would go against the custom. It would seem that the selling of customary land is done at different levels of the customary power chain. If the situation varies from clan to clan, then different studies mention the Mwami (politcal chiefs) as being the main people responsible for customary actions. Generally, today, the guarantors of custom/tradition: «customary chiefs play lesser role as guarantors of customry rights and are more of colluders with modern, commercial, political, administrative elites since they currently depend on traditional chiefs to maintain their statusand them for their revenue »11

10 PALUKU KITAKYA, A. op. cit., p. 289. 11 MATHIEU P., MAFIKIRI TSONGO A., op. cit. 63 | P a g e

Redirecting the land management powers of the customary authorities The land legislation: Withdraws from the customary authorities their power of customary land management. However, by default, the « legal void » gives them a certain legitimacy in management of rural lands not concessioned by the land administration. Takes away from customary chiefs their rights to land ; the concessionors are not legally bound to them. Excludes customary chiefs from their power of management and thus their rights to royalties on rural land became urban land. Therefore the traditional authorities are gradually moved from their (1) right to manage land which is one of the foundations of the custom and (2) their source of income constitution these charges.

The role of customary authorities in the territorial administration Since colonization, traditional authorities have been equipped with particular functions in administration. The colonial state gave them the authority to preside over the customary tribunals to Mwami (the recognized and integrated authority in the judicial constitution of the state). In 1973, the Bamis became the community chiefs and thus official elements in the administrative and command chains of the capital in the rural areas In the same period, they became presidents of the unique party MPR in the communities. The 2006 constitution reaffirms the administrative role of the Mwamis. They are the chiefs of the decentralized entity: chiefdom. The chief of the chiefdom is “designated by the local custom with respect to the law on the status of customary chiefs” then included in the Gorvenor of the Province (Art. 67 and 80 of the organic law n° 08/016 of 07 october 2008 on composition, organisation and functioning of the Decentralized Territorial Entitiies and their relations with the State and the Provinces). «the limits […] of the chiefdoms are fixed by the Prime Minister’s Decree taken on the proposal of the Minister of Republic and internal affairs in its powes, with assent from the Provincial Assembly ». The leadership bodies are: the council of chiefs whose members are elected on universal suffrage and the executif electoral body composed of the chief of the chiefdom without mentionning any land according to Article 84 of the Law mentioned earlier. « ensures to […] b) safeguarding heritage and, especially: […] b. management area/ domain; ». The roles and responsabilites of the chief of chiefdom and the customary chief (Mwami) are elements of confusion for the local populations. The customary authorities progressively acted as “extensions of the state” which (have as consequence an antagonizing process between the customary authority and its social foundations in local communities, and a social transformation in rural areas »12

VIII.6. PARTIAL CONCLUSION

12 VAN ACKER, V., La « pembénisation » du HautKivu : opportunisme et droits fonciers revisités. 64 | P a g e

According to Professor Mugangu Matabaro «the land problem in eastern DRC is fundamentally in terms of management, and that is to say, the legal status of exploiters on the one hand and the institutional framework of management on the other hand ». Two systems of land management coexist in Congo: A legal system for the implementation of Land Code, however, it has been heavily ciritized for many years because: o Certain complex provisions are not applicable o Source of confusion (though translated in local languages), for the users and the administrative authorities who are charged with its application. Local and customary practices. Faced with cumbersome and costly official security procedures, and given the "legal vacuum" of customary rights, local actors develop and use the means of securing land alongside the Act. These practices allow recognition and securing local transactions and access to land. However these: o Are extremely fragile in the context (1) high pressure on land as in Kivu and (2) challenging the customary authorities, o do not preserve the populations of attempted robberies from external and local actors to their advantage and sometimes fraudulently legal procedures. Currently, neither of the two management systems ensures security of land belonging to the poorest. One of the key issues of land issue in DRC and Kivu in particular is to develop a system which combines traditional practices of land access and administrative management regulated by law.

IX. REGIONAL, CONTINENTAL AND INTERNATIONAL INITIATIVES:

Some initiatives to limit or counter large scale land grabbing are taken from here and there but without real impact on the lives of smallscale producers en DRC. We present in this paragraph what the leaders of some organizations need to know in order to integrate them in their struggle and get maximize profits that they offer.

1. The charter of the SADC states in management of natural resources including land. 2. Very recently, the Dakar Declaration, made by the world at the World Social Forum that just took place in Dakar in February 2011. 3. . African Unity declaration for the management of natural resources, including land. The code of good conduct and guidelines for transparency and accountability on land issues in the third world countries. 4. The volunteers’ directives that FAO and the UN are establishing through major consultations with all stakeholders: political, economic and the civil society. 5. It should be noted here "PIDESC" International Covenant on Social and cultural Rights which is a tool that some players want to put in place to force the states who have signed this pact of voluntary directives to comply with and implement these commitments. This complement to the pact, like the others is far from being signed by the States concerned. The greatest weakness we can not in relation to these initiatives is that they are voluntary in nature and therefore are not binding for the states and the various signatories.

65 | P a g e

X. CASES OF FARMERS STRUGGLE THAT CAN SERVE AS EXAMPLES OF DEFENDING LAND RIGHTS.

66 | P a g e

XI. CASES THAT CAN SERVE AS EXAMPLES OF FIGHTING FOR DEFENDING OF SMALLSCALE FARMER LAND RIGHTS IN NORTH KIVU PROVINCE.

Note: This list is not exhaustive. It is for illustrative purposes that we decided to integrate this small paragraph, to show the many readers and actors that there exists in the province examples that can serve as future actions to be undertaken in a much broader program. There are certainly many other more interesting cases than those we presented here. The various EAFF officials together with its members must make an effort to identify, add value and develop and strengthen them if necessary .

N° ACTORS EXPERIENCE OBSERVATIONS LOCAL CIVIL SOCIETY INITIATIVES 1. SYDIP Codification of principles of customary land. Many communities now have the customary principles Training of rural paralegals codified. This avoids manipulations and doubtful Legal support in courts and tribunals. interpretations by the different actors through the decrease in oral operations. 2. AAP Legal support for the vulnerable in courts. Enriching experience where they focused on the peaceful Have in place a CEJ – Centre for Legal resolution of conflicts through Centers for Legal Counseling Justice. Land security through supporting the vulnerable in the process for obtaining legal documents 3. FOPAC Training of rural Good coalition strategy with other land actors both Lobbying around the agriculture code government and civil society. Supporting the process of installing CARGs Multifaceted approach from legal support to technical in the territories and communities in the support in protection and conservation of soil and province agricultural production. The agricultural code has been adopted by the Congolese National Assembly. 4. F.AT. Lobbying around the land laws, agricultural More oriented towards lobbying and advocacy in order to Code at the national level have more equitable laws in management of land by

67 | P a g e

Lobbying around the improvement of government authorities. Agricultural Code recently adopted customary practices in land issues through by the national assembly as the code of good conduct for the having in place the Code of Conduct for traditional leaders in land matters, has been treated by the traditional leaders in land management. provincial assembly. It is scheduled for adoption in June. Several surveys and studies around the land Good networking initiative for land actors in the province. issues. Good collaboration between the government authorities Support in networking of actors in land issues and customary leadership. in the province through the CECAF – Framework for Exchange and Dialogue for Land Actors in North Kivu. 5. CECAF Network of local actors involved in land in Initiative still young but promising as it can help avoid North Kivu province duplication, creating positive synergies and harmonization of interventions as well as the implementation of common strategies around key provincial issues and problems 6. UWAKI Put in place dialogue committees around the Dialogue committees to give support especially in terms of land issues in the territories. gender and access by women to land. Defend the women land rights.

7. LOFEPACO Defending women land rights. Training of women leaders for lobbying in gender and women acces to land. 8. ASP Conflict resolution through legal support for Peaceful conflict resolution approach at the local level. the vulnerable in the courts and tribunals. Several studies on land problem/issue in Masisi territory; 9. PREPYG Defending land rights for the pygmy people Good initiative for these marginalized people and whose land rights are violated and land grabbed by other people. 10. APRODEPED Securing land through by supporting the Good approach of integration and bringing together of vulnerable in acquiring land documents/titles. customary chiefs and the leaders of the people. Training of leaders and customary chiefs on matters relating to land. 11. CACUDEKI Training of paralegals and customary chiefs Good initiative in bringing together the administration, the in land issues. customary leaders and the populations.

68 | P a g e

GOVERNMENT INITIATIVES 12. STAREC Conflict resolution through putting in place of Government initiative for peace in the East of D.R.C. CFLPs Local Land Committees for conflict resolution and Peace. INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND UNITED NATIONS SYSTEMS INITIATIVES. 13. UN HABITAT Conflit resolution through having in place Interesting support in that it builds the existing local local committees for land reconciliation. dynamics instead of investing directly in the resolution of Coordination national and international land conflicts on the ground. actors clusters at the provincial level. Good initiative for defending the land rights of the displaced and refugee populations 14. NRC Land conflict resolution through putting in Good initiaitive that complements UN HABITAT. place of local committees in charge of conflict an effective collaboration with local organizations is still resolution. necessary. Defending the rights of the displaced and the refugees 15. H.C.R Defending refugee land rights Internation initiative specialized in defending the rights of refugees. Putting in place committees for refugees.

XII. SOME RECOMMENDATIONS AND STRATEGIES PROPOSED TO THE LEADERS OF EAFF FOR FIGHTING AGAINST LAND GRABBING. N° ACTORS STRATEGIES AND POLICIES

69 | P a g e

LOCAL NATIONAL REGIONAL INTERNATIONAL 1. Government Collect undertake lobbying for Create alliances Same as the regional level comprehensive decentralization. with other information for its Be integrated and organizations and efficient use. participate in the work of initiatives not only the different reform for signing commissions and put in plac agreements and laws on land and other pacts but for their natural resources. Law on effective land, animal rearing, application. fisheries etc. Participate in Build alliances with other engage with Collaboration with international decentalized land actors in order to have more regional organizations and make use of management organs. force including government organizations for international tools for protection organs. powerful lobbying smallscale farmer land rights. at this level. Build capacities of Insist on the application Disseminate and Same as the regional level local organizations so and respecting of make use of all the they can demand agreements and covenants opportunities accountability from that the country has signed. (regional the local leaders. Disseminate the various organizations, pacts national and international and agreements) for tools ; smallscale farmers’ land rights. 2. Companies/enterprises. Build capacities of Learn about the congolese Collaborate with Undertake lobbying for the farmer organizations and other tax facilities other farmer accountability and transparency in and unions to assert organizations in the the land market in DRC in their legitimate rights region in order to particular and in Africa generally. on land. make use of the ILC « International Land OHADA system in Coalition » is particularly active order to understand in this and can be a good the acquisition partner/ally.

70 | P a g e

mecanism of land markets. Build negotiation Undertake lobbying for capacities for more justice and equity developement and among the indeigenous investment proposals populations. by the enterprises. Develop a set of specification for community development. Develop professional Put in place conditions for unionists where job qualified local workforce. are offered by the established enterprises/companies. 3. Purchasers/buyers Negotiating for Insist on a land reformE for Organize and To do lobbying for the respect of valuing by the local the recovery of land African campaign guidelines and principles of communities of fraudulently acquired. for the rights of equity and morality and especially regular and legally indeginous people for the European companies acquired concessions. on their resources and especially land resource. A coexistence pact Insist of regularizing if not As above. Collaborate with organizations between the large and fair and equitable from the North for lobbying in small scale operators compensation by the order to preserve the country’s in the rural areas. acquirers/purchasers. land for general development of the DRC. 4. Local elite Build capacities for Insist om more just and negotiation of equitable laws which contracts for untapped prevents concentration of concessions. land among a few political,

71 | P a g e

economic or intellectual elite. Undertake a Which civil society to insist ? systematic census of on accountability of leaders. non exploited concessions while indicating their owners. (This study has just produced a draft). Insist on mandatory ? declaration of property by public servants before taking office. 5. Customary chiefs. Insist on respecting of Redefine the role of Who in the customary principles customary chiefs in land countries have been in the management of management. able to improve the customary land. role and status of the customary chiefs? Support the putting in Support FAT efforts in place of local land putting in place a good code commissions or the of conduct for the CCL as provided for customary chiefs for land by the agricultural management. code. Associate ANATC Collaborate with ANATC – with other activities of National Alliance for smallscale farmer Traditional Authorities in organizations. Congo. 5. Smallscale farmer Strengthen local Put in place and streghnthen Connect big farmer organizations. actors in monitoring a farmer movement at the federations with to

72 | P a g e

of land transactions, in national level as is the case other movements in land registry in other countries. other countries. Have in place a specialized Establish a regional service for lobbying in the office or an farmer organisations observation especially those at the mechanism for land regional and national level. grabbing in the developing countries DRC included.

73 | P a g e

XIII. SOME BUSINESS MODELS BETWEEN FARMER ORGANIZATIONS AND OTHER ACTORES IN LAND GRABBING PHENOMENON.

Several elements of models have already been mentioned in the paragraph of strategies and policies. The following aspects should, however, be highlighted: There is no one largescale acquisition, concentration, ownership known as land grab which is the only model for production model. Several other models exist and can be experimented on in DRC in general and in North Kivu in particular. They are:

1. Making available to locals land and their lease by businesses. This system allows the farmers to retain ownership of their land and contribute to a rational exploitation of these lands through a clear and specific contract on the operating modes of the land. For example, limiting the use of pesticides, fertilizers and other harmful techniques greedy and hence irrational non viable use of land...

2. The integration of “land” inputs in operating capital of the investors. This option has the advantage for indigenous populations to participate in the profits acquired by the enterprise (business). And at the same time, it has the danger of participating in losses due to poor management of business or bankruptcy of the company. The greatest difficulty would be evaluation in figures of this “land” capital contribution. We must have expertise which is not always available in several developing countries. The DRC and the province of North Kivu unfortunately do not escape this sad reality.

3. Modernnizing smallscale agriculture : This formula consists of what an enterprise would want to exploit, or engage especially in supporting smallscale farmers so that they can produce better (in quality and quantity) so as to supply raw materials to the enterprise or company. To do this the enterprise not only provides technical support – supply of inputs (improved seeds, fertilizers…) but also support in provides market flow of farmer produce at remunerative prices. This model developed tens of years ago in certain territories of North Kivu has bore good fruits. The MIDEMA case for wheat and the CEE Kivu programme for reintroduction of palm oil are such examples. This system offers the advantage of leaving and motivating/encouraging the land owners to invest more in their land for more profitability.

4. Intergrate in the upward and downward production chaine. If there exists a market for a given agricultural product; there’ll certainly exist a market for the inputs and outputs of this product. The companies/enterprises do not have to be transformed into producers. They can be integrated into the production chain upwards or downwards to the consumer level. It is an issue of being specialized and moving on to a profitable level in which there’s more value added. The models already exist in countries in southern Africa, and in other continents and it would be appropriate to visit them to get inspiration from them.

5. In all cases, we must not fall in a trap where we are opposed to large scale agricultural production. We should rather analyze the complementarities that exist between the two production models. This will allow for improvement of negative perceptions that some have visàvis the others.

74 | P a g e

XIV: GENERAL CONCLUSION.

Bibliography.

75 | P a g e