Namibia's Land Bill: A Call for Historical Data and Accountability
The introduction of the new land bill on October 1st marks a significant legislative shift, but it should not proceed without a thorough and immediate land audit. This bill challenges the status quo by repealing the Agricultural (Commercial) Land Reform Act of 1995, effectively erasing two decades of legal precedent.
However, the parliament's rush to implement this overhaul without addressing the underlying issues is concerning. Here's why a comprehensive audit is crucial:
Unveiling the Past, Shaping the Future
The bill's central enforcement mechanism, Article 110, introduces a strict 'beneficial use' requirement, mandating productive land use within 90 days or risk tenure cancellation. This shift from ownership to conditional lease raises questions.
How can we ensure fair enforcement of this aggressive standard if we haven't answered these critical historical questions?
- Scale of Failure: How many farms were acquired, how many farmers resettled, and how many resettlement farms are currently abandoned by region? The //Kharas region, for instance, saw 30 farms left unused, covering 225,000 hectares. What's the national picture?
- Economic Feasibility: Are beneficiaries being resettled on land that's too large for sustainable farming, making it economically unviable?
- Equity and Allocation: What is the ethnic breakdown of resettled farmers by region? How many farms have been allocated to locals versus those from other parts of Namibia?
- Integration Success: What is the success rate of resettled farmers transitioning into commercial agriculture and becoming food producers?
Policy Risks and the Need for Data
The absence of historical data compounds the bill's policy risks:
- Internal Injustice: Without audit data, the promise of 'equality' may be built on policies that merely redistribute idleness or favor specific groups. The bill's emphasis on strengthening communal rights for the rural majority adds complexity.
- Contradictory Approach: The bill bans foreign nationals from acquiring commercial land, but ignores the productivity failure among local beneficiaries. Addressing internal bias and land idleness should be prioritized before focusing on external restrictions.
- Unclear Incentives: The bill's compensation clause for improvements is meaningless if the state can't define or measure 'success'.
The Case for Historical Data
Obtaining historical data should be a priority before the new law is enacted. The parliamentary committee must use its subpoena power to secure the resettlement farm register and productivity data.
Transparency is key: the findings must be made public immediately to inform parliamentary debates. Restorative justice requires accountability, not just acquisition. Voters deserve to see data on justice versus work.
Given Namibia's recent history of scandals (Fuelrot, Fishrot, SME Bank collapse, missing pension funds, and low foreign investment), the government's trustworthiness is questionable. An impartial, independent land audit is essential for accountability.
Frederick Kotze, a concerned Namibian, advocates for a data-driven approach to ensure Namibia's success for all. Sometimes, challenging the status quo is necessary.
