Maravi

(ZIMPAPERS) US court dimisses white farmers’ claim

US court dimisses white farmers’ claim
Saturday, 19 February 2011 23:47 Top Stories
By Tafadzwa Chiremba

A UNITED STATES court has dismissed an application by 13 former Zimbabwean white farmers who were seeking an order to seize proceeds from diamond sales and attach various assets in the country.

All the former farmers were of the Netherlands origin and wanted the diamond proceeds and the property as compensation for losing farms to the land reform programme.
But Judge Collen McMahon sitting at the US District Court in New York last week dismissed the application and ordered the clerk of court to strike it off the register.

The Dutch farmers approached the New York court with an award earlier granted by the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Dispute (ICSID) after suing Zimbabwe for alleged breach of Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT), following the historic land reform exercise.
The farmers alleged that they were failing to collect the sum of about 54 million Euros awarded by ICSID as breach of BIT from the Government of Zimbabwe.

They wanted the court to modify the award to include the Zimbabwe Mining Development Corporation (ZMDC), Minerals Mining Corporation of Zimbabwe (MMCZ), Agribank, the Industrial Development Corporation (IDC) and the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe (RBZ) as respondents in order to proceed with the writ of execution.
“The petitioners’ motion for modification of the judgment entered on February 1, 2010, and for a writ of execution is denied,” ruled Judge McMahon.
“The docket clerk is instructed to remove docket entry number 12 from the court’s list of pending motions.”

AFRICAN FOCUS: No going back on land

The judgment came after Zimbabwe had set up a team of lawyers to oppose the post-judgment writs of execution. The lawyers were from Sawyer and Mkushi, Takundwa and Associates and Hogwe, Dzimirai and Partners.

They were led and coordinated by Mr Farai Mutamangira of Mutamangira and Associates and Mr Richard Roberts from the US.
The team of lawyers argued that the Netherlands was part of the European Union, a regional bloc that imposed illegal sanctions on Zimbabwe to dissuade investment and trade agreement.

They said the continued renewal of sanctions by the EU, with Netherlands voting for them, constituted rejection of contractual trade agreements.

“The Netherlands is part of the EU, which collectively imposed sanctions on Zimbabwe on the basis of Article 94 of the Cotonou Agreement,” the lawyers argued.

“The Cotonou Agreement is a regional trade pact between the EU, Africa and the Pacific and Caribbean states which defines the framework for regional trade and cooperation and bilateral agreements between member States.

“Member states covered by the agreement are generally supposed to be consistent with regional trade pacts and give effect and render operative the broad terms of the regional agreement.
“The imposition of sanctions on the respondent by the EU constitutes a repudiation of all contractual and treaty rights and obligations by the EU, including the bilateral agreements. Consequently the Dutch nationals are not entitled to relief.”

The lawyers argued that there was no demonstration that the farmers failed to collect their award from the Government of Zimbabwe.
“No evidence has been tendered before the court to establish failure on the part of the petitioners to collect the award in the municipal jurisdiction of the State of Zimbabwe,” they said.

The dismissal of the case comes after some former white farmers threatened to attach properties belonging to Zimbabwe in South Africa after the contested SADC Tribunal awarded them claims to reverse the land reform exercise. The SADC Tribunal judgment ordered Zimbabwe to compensate white farmers for land acquired for resettlement. Zimbabwe’s High Court refused to register the ruling, saying it was against the national interest.

Labels: AFRIFORUM, LAND REFORM, RHODESIANS, WHITE FARMERS

posted by MrK @ 7:14 PM