- ActionAid
- Focus areas of our work
- How we work
- Countries we work in
- Examples and results
- The organisation
Long expected land policy on its way
|
|
Zambia has been waiting for a new land administration and management policy since 2002. Now the draft is here, and Henry Machina, who is the National Coordinator at Zambia Land Alliance, has taken a quick look at the draft, and he is not impressed.
|
04. June 2007
Zambia has been waiting for a new land administration and management policy since 2002. Now the draft is out, and you can read it here. Henry Machina, who is the National Coordinator at Zambia Land Alliance, has taken a quick look at the draft, and he is not impressed.
- The government is still insisting that there is too much customary land in Zambia. More customary land has to be converted into state-land, and by that leasehold. In other words we have to take more land from the traditional leaders and give it to the government, Machina says and continues:
- According to the draft, 94 percent of the land in Zambia is still under the customary land tenure system. That leaves only 6 percent to state-land. I don’t agree with these numbers. I believe the government has been using old statistics. At least 40 percent of the total land area in Zambia all ready belongs to the state to day; housing land, industrial, forestry, mining, national parks or game management areas.
Quick money
The government argues that state-land is used in a more productive way than customary land. So more customary land needs to be converted. But Zambia Land Alliance doesn’t think that’s the right way to do it:
- We have many examples of people, who have converted customary land without utilising it to the maximum. They are just selling it at market-price to make a profit, without making any development on it, Machina says and goes on:
- We are saying, that we must stop that, otherwise people are just making quick money out of nothing. The government should put some form of condition to prevent me to cue up in front of the Ministry of Lands, only because I want to lease a piece of land, so I can sell it afterwards. We should give this land to serious people. People who can develop it and utilize it, that is what is going to develop this country.
The present land policy in Zambia
Zambia has no land policy document. During Kenneth Kaunda’s Presidency land had no value. Understood in that way, that land had so much value to the people of Zambia that nobody was allowed to make a profit out of it. The president however was -and still is - the custodian of all land in Zambia – both state-land and customary land.
When Frederick Chiluba came into power in 1991 he launched a wave of privatisation of public institutions and services all over the country. With the change of system “The 1995 Lands Act” was put in place, which opened up for buying and selling of land. According to the Lands Act investors can lease state-land for up till 99 years. Within that timeframe the investor, who only paid a minor administration-fee for the land, can “sell “ it to other investors at market price.
That’s the law which is operating to day.
The 1995 Lands Act hasn’t been well received by the Zambian people. It is criticised for not been gender sensitive, it doesn’t recognize that women have been disadvantaged for a long time when it comes to access to land. It doesn’t mention anything about people with disabilities, or other disadvantaged groups.
On top of that, the Lands Act has paved way for local and foreign investors to acquire land from the poorest people of Zambia, mainly living on customary land. It is possible for investors to convert customary land into state-land — “leasehold”, if the investor gets a letter of consent from the chief, then approach the District Council in the area and finally gets an offer from the Ministry of Lands. Investors can also expressly by land on the market.
The problem is that while investors have been buying up land; there has been no proper legal protection of the people living on customary land, no proper information about the consequences of the Lands Act, and an inadequate land-administration to handle the new situation.
