Back to Index

Report of the Presidential Land Review Committee on the Implementation of the Fast Track Land Reform Programme, 2000-2002 ('The Utete Report')
Presidential Land Review Committee
circa, October, 2003

http://www.zimbabweinstitute.org/Publications/pub-categories.asp?PubCatID=24

Download this document
- Acrobat PDF version (534KB)
If you do not have the free Acrobat reader on your computer, download it from the Adobe website by clicking here.

Executive summary of the main Findings and Recommendations
1. THE Committee was able to establish, in regard to those who appeared before it at both national and
provincial levels, that:

(a) Ministers and other Government officials wholly supported the Programme, stated it to have been
successfully implemented in the face of formidable odds, but variously noted numerous obstacles that impinged on the implementation process, including resource constraints, the legal framework, bureaucracy and related operational difficulties.

(b) Beneficiaries of the Programme generally expressed happiness with the outcome of Programme implementation and the manner in which their own lives had begun to be transformed, in some cases reportedly dramatically. Yet complaints were also heard from would-be beneficiaries who were awaiting resettlement as promised by their local leaders, particularly the Chiefs, or who, in the case of applicants for the model A2 plots, had still to be informed as to the fate of their applications or as to whether their plots would be given back to them or replacement allocations made where such plots had been taken over irregularly by other persons or where the farms in question had been "delisted". In addition some former white commercial farmers wrote or telephoned the Committee's Secretariat seeking the latter's intervention to enable them to return to their farms on the basis that they were in compliance with all criteria set by Government in this regard. The Committee referred such cases to Government for review and rectification where deemed warranted.

(c) Representatives of farmers' unions, the financial services sector, and agro-business generally saw land reform as vital for the country's political stability and economic development, while however insisting that agriculture be placed on a properly planned and adequately resourced basis.

2. It should be noted that the process of acquiring and distributing land to the people under the two resettlement models, the Al and A2, was undertaken in a complex legal framework which rendered the process both difficult and cumbersome. As the Committee went about its work it could not fail to be struck by the number and variety of legal issues that still required resolution in respect of the acquisition procedures; the allocation of land to beneficiaries, especially under the A2 model; the assessment of the value of improvements; and ownership and access to moveable assets on the farms. Inevitably, the Governmental machinery for administering these matters was taxed to the limit.

Above all, there was a major contradiction observed as between the 1992 Land Acquisition Act as amended, which provides for the compulsory acquisition of land, and the provision embedded in the Constitution which requires that such acquisition be confirmed by the Administrative Court. This contradiction ought to be removed.

3. (a) The Committee established that nationally a total of 2 652 farms with a combined hectarage of 4 231 080 had been allocated to 127 192 households under the A1 resettlement model as of 31st July 2003. The take up rate by beneficiaries was 97%. As for the A2 resettlement model, the corresponding figures were 1 672 farms amounting to 2 198 814 hectares for 7 260 applicant beneficiaries. The take up rate under this model however ranged from 42% (Manicaland) to 100% (Matabeleland South), with an average take up rate of 66% nationally. This failure by some 34% of applicants to take up their allocations implied a considerable amount of land lying fallow or unused while, ironically, thousands of would-be A2 beneficiaries were pressurising the authorities to be allocated land.
(b) Regarding former farm workers the Committee established that a number had been officially resettled under the Programme, and others had secured employment with the new farmers whilst the remainder opted to either return to their countries of origin or to their rural homes in Zimbabwe. The third category however remained in the farm compounds pending a determination of their fate by the Government.

(c) It was also established that 1 323 white farmers remained with 1 377 farms, amounting to 1 175 607 hectares as at 31st July 2003. The total landholding under this category constitutes about 3% of land in the country, excluding land held by corporate entities. The presence or otherwise of these farmers on the land could not in all cases be verified at the time of the compilation of this Report.

(i) The Committee recommends that A2 plots not taken up by applicants already notified of their
availability be allocated to other A2 applicants still on the waiting list subject to the bulk of the land in question being reassigned to, and re-planned for, the A1 model with a view to further decongesting the communal areas.

(ii) The Committee also recommends that the resettlement models be recast with respect to some parts of the country such that the old three-tier model is restored in parts of Matabeleland South.

(iii) The Committee further recommends that a corporate-type model with a component to provide for local community participation is established in plantations, conservancies, safaris and forest areas with particular reference to the two Matabeleland Provinces, Masvingo and Manicaland. The Committee has noted that development in these areas has up until now occurred in a haphazard or segmented manner. Worse, the Fast Track saw what amounted to an attempt to subdivide these areas into individual plots which would clearly be unviable. The Committee calls for a comprehensive policy and approach that would ensure that returns to the country in both local and foreign currency multiply well beyond what has been realised to date.

(iv) The Committee recommends that the issue of leases or other forms of legal title for the beneficiaries of the A2 model be concluded speedily. Such title is vital for assured productive use of the land. The variability in plot sizes and the state of prior improvements on them (including such assets as houses and other infrastructure, etc) should be properly assessed for purposes of determining the quantum of individual lease rentals and other cost recovery measures as may be determined.

(v) The Committee recommends that Government urgently addresses the situation of former farm workers in the farm compounds. Their continued presence on the farms had created numerous problems arising from illegal gold panning, misuse of farm facilities and resources and general criminal activities.

4. Given the historically diverse and pivotal role of women in all aspects of agriculture in the communal lands and the need to strike an overall gender balance in this crucial sector of the economy, measures such as those outlined under the relevant section of Part IV of this Report should be implemented to ensure equity in, and the effectiveness of, the agrarian reform in the country. Moreover, in order to ensure the survival and stability of the growing number of families in rural areas now headed by women and even children as a result of the devastation wreaked on society by the AIDS pandemic, and in the light of the growing phenomenon of the feminisation of poverty among women-headed households, the gender dimension of the agrarian reform needs to be kept uppermost in the transformation of the sector in the context of the Fast Track. The agrarian reform thus constitutes an important vehicle for economically empowering women.

5. Programme implementation was adversely affected by many factors, among them a hostile external political environment, national macro-economic instability, and adverse weather conditions vis-a-vis a largely rain-fed agricultural sector. Other impediments to Programme implementation included limited financial and other resources and administrative difficulties encountered by an over-stretched bureaucratic apparatus suddenly called upon to implement a complex programme in great haste, and in a context that turned out to be exploitable by some through unauthorised and unilateral interventions in the allocation process.

(i) The Committee thus recommends that there be undertaken a major overhaul of the machinery of Government involved in land and agricultural affairs such that these functions are handled by two separate Ministries, a Ministry of Agriculture and a Ministry of Land Affairs.

(ii) The Ministry of Agriculture would deal with all agricultural matters including water development and irrigation. It would also house most if not all of the parastatals currently engaged in agricultural activities of one kind or another. These parastatals themselves would need to be reformed in the manner indicated under Part IV hereunder. In addition the proposed Agricultural Marketing Council (see Part IV) would be so structured as to provide a direct link to the Ministry.

(iii) The Ministry of Land Affairs would have responsibility on all land issues including land registration, resolution of boundary disputes, the proffering of advice to Government on matters of tenure, compensation, farm sizes, land taxation, land subdivisions, distribution and allocation.

(iv) To facilitate the effective functioning of the Ministry of Land Affairs, it is recommended that a semiautonomous National Land Board be established. The Board would exercise both executive and advisory functions vis-a-vis the Ministry.

(v) Further, the Committee recommends that the National Land Board be empowered to ensure that land allocated to the people under the Land Reform Programme is fully utilised. Any demonstrated failure over a defined period to use the land productively especially in regard to the A2 model should result in cancellation of leases, and the re-allocation of the land to those willing and able to make use of it.

Download full document 

Please credit www.kubatana.net if you make use of material from this website. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License unless stated otherwise.

TOP