Volume 4

July - September 2002

Land reform: No grounds for action, decides CHR 

LAND has been a source of political and social conflict in Zimbabwe since its colonisation. In 1965, the white-dominated government of Rhodesia (as it was then called) granted property rights for huge tracts of the state's most fertile land to white farmers who would use the land for commercial farming. The hope was that the Rhodesian state could become a net-food exporter, and that commercial farming would be the primary contributor to the Rhodesian economy. Very small plots of land, or "tribal reserves", were allotted to the remaining black African majority.  Unsurprisingly, access to land and related economic benefits became the primary source of tension between the white minority and the black majority. 

Despite these amendments allowing for government involvement in the transfer of land, there were still widespread discrepancies in land ownership. Many of the farms acquired by the government were given to cabinet ministers or more affluent black families and not to the intended beneficiaries - the landless peasantry. 

This was the problem confronting the government in 1999 when many of the people demanding economic and political reform came together to form the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), the political party that was to become the main opposition to Mugabe's Zanu-PF party. Fearing the rise in popularity and power of the MDC, Mugabe moved the issue of land reform to the top of his political agenda. He, again, campaigned for an amendment to the Constitution that would allow the government to acquire land without compensation. 

This act clearly contravened long-standing principles of the Zimbabwean Constitution, as it involved significantly increasing the powers of the executive office at the expense of Parliament. It also violated the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights, which mandates the observation of property rights. The MDC campaigned for a "no" vote to the referendum and defeated it in early 2000, marking the first time in Zimbabwean history that the opposition had defeated a referendum pushed by Mugabe's Zanu-PF. With the presidential elections barely two years away, Mugabe felt his position was jeopardised by the popularity of the MDC. Land issues were to become a significant factor in the upcoming elections. 

To combat the rising popularity of the MDC, Mugabe has used the issue of land reform as a tool to stifle political opposition. Through physical intimidation, violence and the arbitrary arrest and detention of individuals, he has curtailed the freedom of expression. After the referendum amending the Constitution was defeated in February 2000, the Zimbabwean government resurrected the call for radical land redistribution and condoned the new wave of grassroots land occupations that followed. The observance of private property was compromised, as landless peasants would often set up residence on commercial farms. The police were told not to respond to the complaints of the landowners and not to remove the squatters from the premises. 

In an effort to increase popularity, the government then announced its "fast track" resettlement programme in July 2000 stating that it would acquire more than 3,000 farms for redistribution. The 1990 Land Acquisition Act was amended to state that land could be compulsorily acquired and that the "former colonial power" would compensate the former landowners. The Zimbabwean Constitution mandating the criteria for land acquisition, however, was not changed. Derelict or underutilised farms owned by foreigners holding more than one property were vulnerable to reclamation. 

Between June 2000 and February 2001, the government acquired a national total of 2,706 farms, covering more than six million hectares. The characteristics of these farms, however, did not fit the constitutional criteria for farm acquisition. Under the "fast track" system, the criteria have been largely ignored, as has the Constitution. Specifically, the reclamation of farming land revolved more around whether the owner was a supporter of the MDC than whether or not the land fit the criteria for acquisition. 

With this practice, Zimbabwe violated, among other provisions, Article 21 (2) of the African Charter which states: "dispossessed people shall have the right to the lawful recovery of their property as well as to adequate compensation". It also violated the principle of non-discrimination provided in the African Charter and other international human rights instruments.The UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination expressed its concerns stating: "The State party is encouraged to continue its study of land reform measures with a view to implementing [the programme] in accordance with due process of law and in a manner that will enhance the economic and social rights of its citizens" (CERD/C/304/Add.92). 

In the prelude to the March 2002 presidential elections, there were widespread reports of physical violence and intimidation emanating from land acquisition practices. The US State Department reported that "[r]uling party supporters and war veterans, with material support from the Government, expanded their occupation of commercial farms, and in some cases killed, abducted, tortured, beat, abused, raped, and threatened farm owners, their workers, opposition party members, and other persons believed to be sympathetic to the opposition". 

In 2002, the U.N. Special Representative on Human Rights Defenders stated: "Vice-President Mr. Joseph Msika and other government officials reportedly appeared to be inciting violent action against members of the MDC…. Members of the political opposition and human rights activists are reportedly the targets of threats, detention and physical attack as part of a crackdown on the political opposition in Zimbabwe prior to the elections scheduled for March 2002" (E/CN.4/2002/106). 

Land reform in Zimbabwe has also been used to curtail the freedom of expression as guaranteed by Article 25 (b) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The Zanu-PF government introduced the Public Order and Security Act 2001 to suppress political opposition by outlawing public rallies and allowing for the jailing of politicians for long periods of time without trial. The new law also considers acts such as advocating civil disobedience, publishing false statements prejudicial to the State and "undermining the authority or insulting the President" as criminal violations. This Act has provided the basis for numerous, arbitrary detentions of political activists. 

On 13 March 2002, Robert Mugabe was "re-elected" president of Zimbabwe in an election marred by violence, intimidation and voter corruption. The voice of the people was not heard as Mugabe used his tools of violence, arbitrary arrest and detention to limit free expression of the Zimbabwean people. Using the policy of land reform - a tool meant to empower the people - Mugabe effectively suppressed them. This led to Zimbabwe's suspension from the Commonwealth for one year. 

Mugabe recently proclaimed that those individuals who received farms through the land reform programme "proudly hold an asset which symbolises a meaningful independence, an asset on the basis of which they can gain a sound livelihood".  The Zimbabwean government has also indicated that it is nearing the end of the land reform process, and that it has "completed acquiring and gazetting farms for resettlement".  The lack of a formal structure or process by which people have been awarded land, as well as concerns over the political nature of the awarding of the land, may make receiving it less meaningful than Mugabe asserts.  

There is concern that supporters of opposition parties are prevented from receiving land, while supporters of Zanu-PF, including those in Mugabe's inner circle, are given preference.  Independent media in Zimbabwe have alleged that top government officials, as well as senior members of the police and army, have been getting the best of the commercial land claimed by the government under the land reform programme. The nature of the land reform programme also means that peasants who do receive farmland are unsure as to the validity of their title. 

The most immediate impact of the land reform programme is its effect on Zimbabwe's food supplies.  The World Food Program (WFP) reports that Zimbabwe is facing an "immediate, serious food crisis" and projects that about half the Zimbabwean population will need food aid by the end of 2002. While Mugabe denies that the land reform programme has had an effect on food production, he has described the food shortage as "critical", and has appealed to the international community for assistance.  According to the WFP, the region has been affected by severe drought, but the food shortage has been exacerbated by the disruption to the commercial farming industry (which used to provide one-third of the total cereals produced in the country) due to Mugabe's land reform programme. 

A draft resolution sponsored by the European Union at the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) during its 58th session in March-April 2002 addressed the situation in Zimbabwe. It expressed concern at attacks on the independence of the judiciary and the rule of law; cases of sexual and other forms of violence against women, racially motivated intimidation of Zimbabwe's minority ethnic communities; the violations of freedoms of expression, opinion, association and assembly in Zimbabwe; the disregard by the Executive of Court rulings; and acts of intimidation and persecution directed against representatives of the churches. 

The resolution also noted “the importance of fair, just and sustainable land reform” in a preambular paragraph. However, it failed to recommend any concrete measures to address the issue of land reform in the operative paragraphs. 

Nevertheless, the draft resolution went nowhere. A no-action motion was called, and passed. 

Member States of the CHR effectively refused to acknowledge the extent of human rights violations in Zimbabwe.