Executive Summary
The ‘Zimbabwe Land Policy Study’, is a policy research paper, commissioned and edited by the Zimbabwe Institute. The paper contains a detailed overview of existing land policy in Zimbabwe, providing in-depth analysis of its prominent shortcomings and mapping out a way forward. One of the fundamental aims of the paper was to evaluate and critique the MDC’s existing policy on land reform and to provide guidance on the way forward. It is hoped that the policy recommendations contained in the paper will assist the MDC with improving and strengthening their own policy paper on land reform, which is scheduled to be published shortly.

Chapter Two provides a background to the land issue in Zimbabwe, highlighting its historical dominance of political discourse. This chapter also sets out the purpose of the study, its terms of reference and the methodology that was used.

Chapter Three provides a concise overview of the history of land reform since independence. It points out that at independence in 1980 land reform was acknowledged as the key policy instrument for addressing chronic problems of poverty, household security and inequality that were at the vanguard of the crude legacy left by the white minority regime. The issue of land reform had, after all, been one of the driving forces of the liberation war. Despite the public rhetoric on the need for land reform the policy itself, in the form of ‘Land Reform and Resettlement Programme Phase I and II’ (LRRP 1 and II) achieved little in the way of success.

Under LRRP I the plan was to resettle 168,000 families, however, by 1990 only 52,000 families had been resettled. The paper suggests a number factors that help to explain why this initial attempt at land reform failed to achieve the objectives that had been set. One of the key reasons put forward was that the ‘willing-buyer and willing-seller’ principle contained in the Lancaster House Constitution did not enable the government to buy sufficient land to meet the objectives set out under their land reform programme. Moreover, under the terms of the Lancaster House agreement the government had to abide by this clause in the constitution for the first ten years of independence.

In 1992 therefore, the government, free from its obligations under Lancaster House, enacted the Land Acquisition Act which contained provisions empowering the government to compulsory acquire land for resettlement. In order to raise funds to finance LRRP II the government convened a donors conference in 1998 in Harare, however, funds were not forthcoming as the government refused to address donors concerns on issues relating to transparency and accountability vis-à-vis the land reform process. At this stage it was already becoming apparent that the land reform process was primarily aimed at rewarding the loyalty of the elite rather than tackling the pressing issue of land hunger.

The second part of the overview of the land policy pursued by the Zanu PF government focuses more on the impact of the current ‘fast track’ phase and the arbitrary and unconstitutional changes that were made to the legislative framework pertaining to land acquisition. This section draws attention to the fact that a systematic effort was made by the Executive to undermine the independence of the judiciary and subvert the rule of law in order to remove obstacles to the implementation of the land reform programme.

Arbitrary changes to the legislative framework have contributed to the high level of confusion that has been provoked by the fast track initiative. The paper points out that in most cases the judicial process required to legalise acquisition on most farms has not been finalised and that many people were holding onto land which has not been properly acquired in terms of sections 5, 7 and 8 of the Land Acquisition Amendment Act.

In addition to pointing out the confusion that reigns over the legal status of farms acquired under the fast track scheme, this section of the paper also provides a detailed analysis of the negative impact the scheme has had with regards to agricultural productivity, farm workers, the environment and the economy.

Chapter Four focuses on the MDC’s land policy. It begins by outlining the salient points contained in each of the existing papers that account for the evolution of the MDC’s land policy and proceeds to analyse the core prescriptions vis-à-vis this policy programme. In its evaluation of existing MDC policy, the paper identifies a number of key areas that require either strengthening or further clarification such as ‘land rights’, ‘rural infrastructure development’, ‘restitution/compensation’, ‘decongestion’ and the proposed ‘rationalisation’ strategy.

On the issue of the process of rationalisation (which would seek to reconcile the MDC land policy with the situation on the ground) the paper points out that this element of the policy agenda needs to be expanded in order to clarify the specific procedures and envisaged outcomes of the rationalisation process. This section also draws attention to the need for the MDC to strengthen the gender component of its land policy. For instance, the analysis of the MDC’s current position on ‘land distribution structure’ highlights the need for the MDC to provide clear guidelines on gender access.

Chapter Five attempts to map the way forward, on the basis of observations and analysis contained in chapters three and four, by outlining a proposed land policy framework. It begins by looking at the future legal framework and points out that it is crucial to set up this framework before any actual planning commences. The chapter then proceeds to explore in depth the issues of land administration and land rationalization, highlighting the critical role of the Land Commission and making recommendations as to its terms of reference. One of the key issues that the Land Commission will have to address is the issue of compensation. It will need to determine the level at which it will be set and what the cut-off point is for compensation. For instance, in South Africa the restitution date was set at 1913, the date of the first Land Act. In Zimbabwe a strong case can be put forward to suggest that only those who bought their farms after independence with a certificate of ‘no interest’ from the government will be entitled to full compensation.

Proposals to increase the amount of land available for redistribution include the introduction of a land tax and the imposition of a ceiling on landholdings. The case for the introduction of a land tax is premised on the fact that this is a fundamental requirement for stimulating the land market on the grounds that it would encourage those who underutilize their land to voluntarily surrender it.

On the critical issue of land tenure a number of significant reforms need to be implemented, in particular amending the legislative framework so that land tenure is held under one law and putting in place a series of measures aimed at creating a single tenure system – which will include dissolving the communal areas.

Chapter Six looks at the implementation strategy, in particular the transitional recovery plan. The immediate challenge for a new democratic dispensation will be to ensure that a recovery plan is developed and implemented at the earliest opportunity in order to tackle the humanitarian crisis that has engulfed Zimbabwe. It will be important, at an early stage, to identify areas with above average agricultural production and getting these areas back into production with support for essential inputs such as seed, fertilizer etc. Once the land has been identified, direct negotiations for implementing the envisaged programme will need to be held with those who are occupying the land.

The final chapter contains the conclusions and recommendations and summarises and highlights some of the crucial points emerging from the paper. One of the key issues that is highlighted concerns the need to have a long term strategy that addresses agrarian reform beyond land reform. This will require assessment of the levels of technical, financial and institutional support for the agricultural sector as a whole.

Land reform is central to Zimbabwe’s socio-economic development. Unless the land issue is effectively resolved, to the satisfaction of all stakeholders, it will remain a contentious issue within Zimbabwe and an issue therefore capable of having a destabilising effect both in a political context as well as in a broader socio-economic context. It is hoped that this paper will play an influential role in shaping a policy agenda that can resolve the land question once and for all and ensure that this fundamental natural resource is utilised in a sustainable manner to the benefit of all Zimbabweans.