Land Reform in Namibia and Zimbabwe: a Comparative Perspective Lloyd Mambo Sachikonye (University of Zimbabwe)
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
WHO SHOULD OWN THE LAND? Analyses and Views on Land Reform and the Land Question in Namibia and Southern Africa Edited by JUSTINE HUNTER Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung Namibia Institute for Democracy Who Should Own the Land? i Published by Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung Namibia Institute for Democracy Edited by Justine Hunter © Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung Namibia Institute for Democracy February 2004 No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage or retrieval system, without the written permission of the publisher. Cover picture: “Getting water from well” by John A Muafangejo © Arts Association of Namibia, National Art Gallery of Namibia Cover design: DV8 Language editing: Sandie Fitchat Layout: Perri Caplan Printing: John Meinert Printing (1999), Windhoek, 2004 ISBN: 99916–796–9–3 Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung Namibia Institute for Democracy PO Box 1145 PO Box 11956 Windhoek Klein Windhoek Namibia Namibia Tel.: +264 61 232156 Tel.: +264 61 229117 Fax: +264 61 225678 Fax: +264 61 229119 ii Who Should Own the Land? WHO SHOULD OWN THE LAND? Analyses and Views on Land Reform and the Land Question in Namibia and Southern Africa Justine Hunter (Ed.) Contributions Willie Breytenbach Ben Fuller Colleen Muchinarwo Gwari Oliver Horsthemke Justine Hunter Uazuva Kaumbi Willem Moore Dirk Mudge Lloyd Mambo Sachikonye Robin Sherbourne Wolfgang Werner Interviews Alfred Angula Jan de Wet Hon. Marco Hausiku Risto Kapenda Hon. Hifikepunye Pohamba Who Should Own the Land? iii iv Who Should Own the Land? Table of contents List of abbreviations.......................................................................................................................... vi Who should own the land? An introduction Justine Hunter (Namibia Institute for Democracy) ................................................................................1 A rich man’s hobby Robin Sherbourne (Institute for Public Policy Research) ....................................................................8 Promoting development among farm workers: Some options for Namibia Wolfgang Werner (Independent consultant)........................................................................................ 19 Land reform in southern Africa Willie Breytenbach (University of Stellenbosch) ................................................................................. 46 Land reform in Namibia and Zimbabwe: A comparative perspective Lloyd Mambo Sachikonye (University of Zimbabwe) ........................................................................ 64 A Namibian path for land reform Ben Fuller (Namibian Economic Policy Research Unit) ................................................................... 83 Land reform in Namibia: Opportunity or opportunism? Oliver Horsthemke (Permanent Technical Team on Land Reform) ............................................ 87 The land is ours Uazuva Kaumbi (Pan African Centre of Namibia)............................................................................... 92 The year 2003: Crisis or opportunity? Willem Moore (University of Namibia) .................................................................................................. 95 Land reform in perspective Dirk Mudge (Member of the Kalkfeld Farmers’ Association) .......................................................100 The agrarian revolution in Zimbabwe and the plight of an ordinary man Colleen Muchinarwo Gwari (formerly of the Daily News, Zimbabwe) .....................................104 Interviews on land reform in Namibia Justine Hunter (Namibia Institute for Democracy) ..........................................................................109 Land reform in Namibia: A bibliography Wolfgang Werner (Independent consultant) with inputs from Robin Sherbourne (Institute for Public Policy Research) ........................................................ 122 APPENDIX 1: Bibliography on land reform in Namibia Robin Sherbourne (Institute for Public Policy Research).................................................132 APPENDIX 2: Geographical maps......................................................................................................133 APPENDIX 3: Key trends in farm ownership transactions, 1990-2002 ............CD-Rom Who Should Own the Land? v List of abbreviations AEA Agricultural Employers’ Association (Namibia) ANC African National Congress (South Africa) DRC Democratic Republic of Congo FCTZ Farm Community Trust of Zimbabwe LSU large stock unit NAFWU Namibia Farmworkers Union NAU Namibia Agricultural Union NGO non-governmental organisation SADC Southern African Development Community SSU small stock unit VIDCO Village Development Committee (Zimbabwe) ZANU-PF Zimbabwe African National Union Patriotic Front vi Who Should Own the Land? Who should own the land? An introduction Justine Hunter (Namibia Institute for Democracy) We have been fighting for the land, but we still have only pieces of it. Most of the land is still occupied by those who enjoyed a long period of prosperity by exploiting Namibians. These people become more prosperous while people such as us, who live in informal settlements, feel hopeless. The land must be divided equally. (Reader’s letter, The Namibian, 24 November 2000) As an obvious projection area of potential social conflicts, the complex and emotional land question has the potential to create or even deepen racial mistrust and hatred. Some 13 years after Namibia achieved independence; the existing land distribution remains an obvious expression of expropria- tion, oppression and extermination of the African people by German and South African colonists, settlers and members of the occupation forces (Werner 2000:9). Unlike other settler colonies such as Zimbabwe and Kenya, the white settlers appropriated agricultural areas that, due to low and unpredictable annual rainfall, are almost exclusively utilisable for extensive stock farming. The central and southern regions, especially those inhabited by the Herero, the Nama and the Damara, were particularly affected by colonial land expulsion. This was mainly because, at the beginning of the 20th century, the German troops were not equipped with the military might to subjugate the influential northern kingdoms. Consequently, Namibia inherited an extremely asymmetrical distribution of land. At independence, 52% of the agricultural farmland was in the hands of the white commercial farmer community, who made up 6% of the Namibian population. The remaining 94% of the population had to put up with owning only 48% of the agricultural land. Situated in the former “homelands”1, due to the population density and the lack of resources, the agricultural productivity of communal farmland was very limited. The majority of Namibians, who populate the communal 1 Separate development under the former South African apartheid regime dictated that various ethnic groups lived in designed regions – homelands – in Namibia. Who Should Own the Land? An introduction 1 areas, are subsistence farmers who live off and from the land without owning it.2 The economically viable, so-called commercial farm sector is the biggest employer in Namibia: the number of farm workers and the members of their families amount to around 230,000 people (Werner 2001:260). Though rather prominent, the land question is only one aspect of various inherited inequalities and the overall need for a redistribution of wealth. Namibia suffered under an extreme, protracted and differentiated colonial experience. Under German colonial rule, the extermination of the indigenous population and the expropriation of land began. After Namibia had fallen under South African’s control, systematic racial discrimination culminated in the implementation of apartheid politics. As a result of a lengthy and bitter liberation struggle, the country gained its independence in 1990. When the established system was eventually overcome, it occurred not by way of a revolution or violent takeover, but by a controlled change of system and an internally and externally negotiated settlement. The constitutional princi- ples adopted as a compromise in the early 1980s and which formed the foundation of the new national constitution guaranteed property rights after independence. Acknowledging their mutual dependency, the former oppo- nents agreed that an apocalyptic disintegration of the territory had to be avoided, and both political and economic stability secured. Accordingly, the introduction of a policy of national reconciliation after independence expresses the postulated common interest and national fate as fundamental to nation-building, while Article 16 of the Constitution (RoN 1990) legally entitles landowners to their private property. At a symposium organised by the German Vereinte Evangelische Mission (VEM) in May 2001, the participants identified specific certain stumbling blocks that hamper the solution of the Namibian land question (Motte 2002:10): ➾ Differing land rights within the country ➾ The use of commercial land almost exclusively for extensive stock-farming ➾ The way possible beneficiaries of the land redistribution process are selected and qualified ➾ The financing of land reform ➾ The relatively minor implications of land reform within the private sector for the economic and social development of the nation as a whole, and ➾ The political interest and opportunities available to the Government. There seems to be a consensus among Namibian parliamentarians