THE NGO NETWORK ALLIANCE PROJECT - an online community for Zimbabwean activists  
 View archive by sector
 
 
    HOME THE PROJECT DIRECTORYJOINARCHIVESEARCH E:ACTIVISMBLOGSMSFREEDOM FONELINKS CONTACT US

 

 


Back to Index

NSSA owes former farm workers and farmers millions
Munyaradzi Bwanya
August 15, 2009

The National Social Security Authority (NSSA) is the body charged with the responsibility of securing the post employment socio economic entitlements of all persons who contribute to it throughout the duration of their employment. It is a compulsory form of tax, much like the AIDS levy. Neither the individual nor the employer-s consent is required for payment. In practice the employer pays directly to the authority after abased on how many people the farm employed and their respective earnings. In short, the government tells the employer what to pay.

Most farms, before the fast Track exercise were registered businesses obliged to pay the tax. On average, the overwhelming majority of farms paid their dues. The NSSA official was in fact the equivalent of the biblical Zacheo a feared tax collector dreaded by most farm owners. It is whispered that a good number of the individuals became very rich. The point is that as law abiding citizens, the farm businesses paid NSSA contributions in respect of the farmers and the farm workers.

With the advent of the chaotic land reform process, the overwhelming majority of farm workers lost their social security, they lost their shelter, especially those seen to be sympathetic to their former bosses. They now constitute the most significant group of the vulnerable Internally Displaced Persons. More to the point is that they lost their right to stay at the farms which previously had been guaranteed by their employment. When employment was terminated, the right to remain on the farms was also terminated. Realising this, the government obliged through statutory instrument the farm owners to pay "packages" to their former employees. The correct thing to do would have been to oblige the new farm owners to inherit both the benefits and obligations of the farms. This was the final show of the termination of both their right to remain and to work. The farm workers had lost their livelihood.

The new farmers were generally not known to the farm workers who dared to stay unless it was an army general, a judge, a politician or other prominent person. Most new farm owners were either unwilling or unable to maintain the same size workforce or to give the same the same service rewards. More than 30 000 farm workers with extended families of up to 200 000 members lost their livelihoods. A good fraction of them was also not eligible to benefit from the land reform because the prohibition of dual citizenship made them stateless persons and therefore not Zimbabweans. Those that took over the farms did not and still do not run them as registered businesses and do not pay tax. The Zacheo of the old days is generally powerless to compel the prominent beneficiaries of land reform to pay their dues. To date very few farms remain on the NSSA contributions list. Despite it being a compulsory tax, most current farm workers have no contributions to NSSA for the good number of the years since the land reform.

In conclusion, NSSA owes former farm workers and farmers their money. They contributed like all other beneficiaries and they have lost their livelihoods and social security. This is the problem that the scheme was meant to address. It is incumbent upon all Human rights friendly lawyers and civic society organizations that assist with free legal services to assist this mostly indigent group of Zimbabweans to access their money. It should not be difficult to prove that a particular individual worked on a particular farm while the farm was contributing to NSSA. The rule by our courts that they will not allow a floodgate of litigation to open is certainly not meant to deprive citizens of their rights but only to ensure that its processes are not abused. They will not be able to even get media coverage of their cause for lack of funding. The MPs of the affected constituencies ought at the very least consult and debate the issue.

*The author is a final year law student at the University of Zimbabwe

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