By Takura Zhangazha
In the process of undertaking its radical land reform
programme, the Zanu Pf government conveniently but by default retained what renowned
academic Mahmood Mamdani refers to as the ‘bifurcated state'. That is a structured
colonial era divisions of the rural and the urban with the latter always being
the arena of the ‘civil’ in relation to not only law but lifestyle.
A number of studies have also sought to explain the impact
of this fast track land reform programme (FTLRP). Their emphasis however has been on how it has
affected the rural/peasant farmer or the overall capacity of agricultural
production of the country.
What has hwoever been emerging, minus the radical rhetoric
and demonstrations is the utilization of the FTLRP to acquire land that is
adjacent to urban centres, not for the purposes of farming or reclamation, but
for urban investment projects. Particularly for the lucrative housing market.
The latest such case is that of Crowhill farm on the
outskirts of Harare. It is a farm that
has been in dispute since 2011 when the government gazzeted it for
redistribution while the ownership was retained by a private company, Crowhill
Private limited. A dual process began to operate on the farm.
A war veteran claimed the farm while a
private company was claiming ownership of it as an urban residential housing
development area. The matter is now before the courts with the added drama of
Crowhill Private Limited owner, Cephas Msipa (Jr) being sued about the same
land by the actual owner of Crowhill farm, Ozias Bvute.
In the entirety of the process and its outcomes, the most
affected will be residents of the farm who may have paid for stands and are
living there.
The bigger picture points to an alarming ambiguity about
land use within the context of FTLRP. Particularly where it concerns land that
is adjacent to major urban areas. It is
a trend that is also emerging in areas referred to as ‘growth points’ where
property developers and rural district councils are converting rural land or
redistributed farms to urban residential land use.
Given the shortage of affordable housing in the country and
the much touted housing waiting list, this is lucrative business. Property developers are getting land, both by
way of local government approval and through the FTLRP, subdividing it into
stands, and making a killing.
The only problem is that sometimes these approvals from both
central and local government are not necessarily transparent and clear. This was the case in Chitungwiza and Manyame
where houses were demolished and the potential case in other areas where people
are set to lose homes or their investments.
It is a trend that should have policy makers quick on their
feet investigating and examining what is really going on. Some of the key questions that need answers
relate to the honesty of property developers, rural district councils and
central government officials in claiming to provide residential stands at
premium prices without legal veracity or certainty.
Even more important questions relate to examining the link
between urban land and the FTLRP. Are
there emerging land barons/baronesses who are unprofessional and take advantage
of citizens that are desperate to own urban houses? And by so doing, utilize the FTLRP to not
only get the land for a pittance only to make huge profits from it.
There are many other issues that will emerge with the
passage of time and the shifting allegiances in Zanu Pf linked businesses and other
entrepreneurial endeavours. The only
problem is that it is the residents of these areas that will continue to suffer
the brunt of eviction and loss of investment, even at a high asking price.
It is the murky linkages of politicians, property developers
and the potential abuse of the land reform programme that should worry all
Zimbabweans.
This is not to say that investors in property should close
shop. Not at all. It is however to query
why investments are made in unclear circumstances or without fully explaining
to residents the full import of their land purchases, together with the risks
involved (eviction, loss of money).
In
some cases there is downright abandonment of residents by property developers, central
and local governments.
So we come back full circle to the urban versus the
rural. The '3rd Chimurenga' may not have been as 'revolutionary' as ruling party apparatchiks claim. We remain with skewed land ownership patterns that favour a new elite at the expense of a majority landless.
Such patterns are increasingly apparent in areas peripheral to urban areas. Land and housing in the latter may be profit driven endeavours but sadly are used to manipulate the fast track land
redistribution programme for personal benefit.
All at the expense of the desperate homeless who remain uncertain of their tenure while, in some cases, land barons/baronesses laugh all the way to the bank.
No comments:
Post a Comment