Maravi

Debating the land question

Debating the land question
By Editor
Tuesday April 24, 2007 [04:00]

Although land is considered to be a key component of the wealth of any nation, the question of our country's land policy appears to be receiving very little attention. But given the importance of the subject, we have no reason to be shy about debating it. It does not make sense that while most societies or nations are spending a considerable amount of their time and energies to find the best means of administering land to the benefit of their peoples, we seem to have taken it easy; we have folded our arms as if all is well.

A lot has been said about this and that towards the realisation of a satisfactory and equitable land policy in the country. In those pronouncements which have mainly come from our politicians, we find the habitual missing link in terms of the failure to translate words into action.

And this is why even though it is our belief that the question of land should be brought onto the table of our development agenda, we do not think that it would be wise for us to deceive ourselves into believing that politicians such as Mr Michael Sata will be our saviour in terms of finding solutions to this very important question about our land policy.

Yes, we understand and appreciate the fact that politicians are accustomed to speaking to the gallery. But no politician, not least Mr Sata, should cheat themselves or any of us that finding a solution to the land question is as simple as they would like to make us believe. The question of land goes beyond the nauseating rhetoric that politicians like Mr Sata want to subject the people to.

Besides the usual politicking around this subject, what worries us most is that at a time when we should have by now resolved the question of defining land rights and putting in place systems or mechanisms to properly administer land, what we see is a disturbing scenario of a chaotic land administration system.

We are saying this because we are aware of some of the most recent events around the subject of land administration. As we speak now, some senior officers in institutions that are charged with the responsibility of administering land are undergoing investigations over alleged misconduct.

When we should have by now come up with a well-defined and secure land transfer or acquisition system to benefit each and every Zambian in a more equitable and fair manner, we continue to witness a free-for-all approach by cadres to share land among themselves in a style that is totally against what is supposed to be the legal way of acquiring land.

But there are many reasons why we should be worried that we have taken a rather sluggish approach in dealing with our land policy. Apart from the well-documented fact that land policies have been at the centre of conflicts in some countries, we also know that strengthening our land administration system to the benefit of the people would have a positive corollary effect on our agenda for social and economic development.

We say this because we believe that a thoroughly thought-out land policy or administration system would eventually benefit those who are otherwise disadvantaged by the very chaos that has engulfed the institutions that are supposed to be responsible for land administration in the country.

A clear land policy that is generally accepted by and acceptable to us as a people would help strengthen poor people's land rights and ultimately empower most citizens economically. We do not have to re-emphasise or overstate the centrality of land to economic processes such as agriculture in which most of the rural people are engaged.

In most developing countries like Zambia, we know that most land is used for agricultural production, which is a mainstay of economic sustenance for the rural people. By ensuring that people have access to land, we are also talking about the need for people to have somewhere to put up structures for their shelter so that they are not rendered homeless in their own localities.

So when we talk about economic empowerment for the people, especially those in the rural areas, it means nothing if we are unable to address the issue of their access to land.

We cannot have a situation where people have to resort to unorthodox or corrupt means to access land when it should be their natural right for them to possess some piece of land where they can either construct their shelters or engage in some economic activities such as agriculture.

Moreover, we think that the use of land as a primary investment vehicle should also allow people to accumulate and transfer wealth between generations. Further, when people are empowered with land, they can also choose to use it as collateral for securing credits or loans with banks for their various economic activities.

In the final analysis, what we are advocating is the elimination of all forms of anarchy, distortions and disorderliness in the administration of our land, which is a natural and very expensive asset that we possess collectively, although some individuals want to deal with it as if they are the one and only custodian of this most prized national possession. And we can only do so if we start to look at our land policy seriously. The land question, although quite sensitive, is a very important one and we need to start to debate it seriously.

Labels: EDITORIAL, LAND

posted by MrK @ 4:11 AM