Namibia country report

The whole process of farm assessment, valuation and planning for allocation is highlycentralised in the MLR. Suzman argued in 2001 that government’s approach to resettlementwas top-down, particularly with regard to San settlers:Settlers have no officially mandated say in determining the direction of the developmentof resettlement facilities: their participation in decision-making processes is restrictedto the extent that MLRR officials with the power to make decisions choose to consultthem or heed their advice, if ever they do (Suzman 2001: 91).In effect the MLR placed the onus on settlers to conform to the process rather than adaptingthe process to fit the needs of settlers (Maclean 1998: 86, cited in ibid.).2.9 Unauthorised land occupationsUnauthorised land occupations have not been frequent. Where they have occurred, someof the people involved ascribed their actions to the slowness of the land-delivery process.There have been reports of cases in which people occupied state land that had been lyingidle for considerable periods. Although such invasions have been the exception, every casewas met by the full force of the law.The only unauthorised occupation reported in Omaheke Region took place in mid 1998when 56 Herero-speaking families occupied 10 farms located in Omaheke and neighbouringOtjozondjupa Region which the MLRR had purchased for redistribution. Having failed topersuade the families to leave the farms they had occupied illegally over a period of fivemonths, the Ministry obtained a court order to evict them.Among those illegally occupying these farms were senior civil servants in the Ministryof Regional and Local Government and Housing (MRLGH) and the Office of the Speaker.The Minister of Lands, Resettlement and Rehabilitation stated that the police did notinvestigate the complaints laid by the MLRR regarding the illegal occupation, apparently oninstruction from the Minister of Home Affairs. (The latter became the Minister of Landsand Resettlement in 2005.) The MLRR subsequently laid criminal charges against some ofthe farmers for trespassing in terms of the Trespass Ordinance No. 3 of 1962.The Minister of Lands interpreted these illegal occupations as a possible attempt by certainindividuals and groups to challenge the government. She further stated that the majority ofthose who occupied state farms were not poor people but rather senior civil servants, andalleged that many of them had fenced off large tracts of communal land.In fighting back, the “56 Landless Namibian Farmers” organisation said that they would beforced to occupy private land to reclaim their ancestral land rights. They claimed to havelinked up with some trade unions in Namibia as well as “pioneers” in Zimbabwe. While the56 NLF promised to abide by the Court’s decision to have them evicted, they threatened tooccupy the Roman Catholic Church’s farm and mission station, Epukiro, as well as privatefarms surrounding the 10 state farms.44 ● Livelihoods after land reform: Namibia country report (2010)