Undoubtedly influenced by what is happening in Zimbabwe, black Namibians whose ancestral lands were forcibly taken by the German and other colonialists, are saying they may have to do ?a Zimbabwe? in the end, if no amicable solution is found to the land issue in Namibia.

Ten years after independence in 1990, many black Namibians are still without land compared to the white minority who still occupies most of the fertile land in the country.

It all started at the end of the 19th century when German colonisers took the land from the natives and divided it up among themselves. Black Namibians were, and still are, employed as lowly-paid labourers on the farms.

Today, Namibia, a country of about 1.8 million people, has 6,000 commercial farms, 65% of which are owned by whites and 35% by blacks. Foreigners own 2% of the 65% owned by whites.

Commercial agriculture contributes about N$810m a year to the economy (about 6% of GDP). However, nearly 70% of blacks live and are being sustained by communal agriculture, and contribute just about 3% to GDP.

As part of the independence settlement, the national constitution obliged the Namibian state to compensate black Namibians for their lost lands, thus making it expensive for the state to redistribute commercial lands.

To be fair, the government has not been sitting on its hands. A year after gaining independence on 21 March 1990, it convened a historical ?Land Reform Conference? which discussed the land issue in depth. The conference, however, strangely decided that issues relating to ancestral land claims would not be entertained.

The injustice in that decision has led to calls by both the ruling and opposition parties, ordinary people, pan-Africanists and human rights groups for a second land conference. They all want the ?willing seller, willing buyer concept? that has kept most of the best ancestral lands in the hands of whites, to be removed.

Hifikepunye Pohamba, general secretary of the ruling SWAPO party, said recently: ?The advantaged classes of the colonial rule in this country are reluctant to sell part of their land to the state on the basis of the ?willing seller, willing buyer’ policy. As such the government cannot acquire land when and where it wants it.?

In the First National Development Plan (NDP1) adopted in 1990, the government planned to buy 150,000 hectares of farmland to resettle 14,000 people by this year. The Ministry of Lands later admitted that it had underestimated the target. So in 1995 it revised up the figure of landless Namibians to 90,000 and vowed to acquire another 554,000 hectares for resettlement before the turn of the new century.

Yet, recent official figures show that the government has managed to buy only 250 hectares and have resettled about 20,000 black Namibians who were deemed to be in most need of land.

The government continues to buy commercial farms as and when offered by white owners on the ?willing buyer, willing seller? basis. Beneficiaries (the newly settled farmers) are given two years’ support services as an incentive.

Every year, the government budgets N$20m for land acquisition, and recently a Land Acquisition Development Fund bill was passed by parliament. This will allow part of the N$20m to be deposited in the Fund, instead of going back to the Ministry of Finance if not utilised during the year.

Besides, a Commercial Agricultural Land Act has been passed that empowers the minister of lands to expropriate under-utilised and un-utilised land.

There is also an Affirmative Action Loan Scheme from the Agribank. This gives soft loans to communal farmers with large livestock to buy land in commercial areas, after which they have to move out of the communal areas and give the land to smallholders. About 265 farmers have so far been provided with such soft loans.

Yet, many Namibians feel that the definitive solution to the land problem should not be delayed. As a result, the demand for the restoration of ?ancestral [land] rights? is growing. However, they say the manner to address it should not take the form followed by Zimbabwe.

Even President Sam Nujoma, when opening this year’s parliament session, assured the people that land invasion would not happen in Namibia. He said Namibia and Zimbabwe were ?two different countries with different colonial histories?.

Nevertheless, the ?willing seller, willing buyer concept? has met with a lot of criticism from MPs, ordinary people and human rights groups. Pohnele Ya France, an MP of the ruling SWAPO party, who does not mince his words on the land issue, has called for the replacement of the ?willing seller, willing buyer concept?.

?[It encourages] those who possess excessive land to increase their prices, making it difficult for the government to purchase land for resettlement of landless citizens,? says Ya France. ?About 11,000 Namibians have died in the struggle for land and yet land is still in the hands of the whites.?

A former president of the National Union of Namibia Workers (NUNW) before he became MP, Ya France wants the constitution to be changed to allow the government to expropriate land without payment. He argues that ?since the land was stolen in the first place, it is wrong for the state to compensate owners for anything other than the improvement they have made to the land?.

The debate is still on, and although the general mood at the moment is against farm invasions ? la Zimbabwe, anything could happen if the landless people continue to be frustrated. It is a veritable timebomb.

Saima Nanyeni

Back to the top
Contents