COMMISSION ON RESTITUTION OF LAND RIGHTS

IKHOMISHANA YOKUBUYISELA KWAMALUNGELO OMHLABA

KHOMISHINI E MABAPI LE PUSETSO YA DITSHWANELO TSA MAFATSHE

KOMMISSIE OP HERSTEL VAN GRONDREGTE


TO: CHAIRPERSON - PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE AND LAND AFFAIRS

FROM: REGIONAL LAND CLAIMS COMMISSIONER - EC

DATE: 20 APRIL 2005

SUBJECT: ONGELUKSNEK CLAIM - ONGELUKSNEK FARMERS ASSOCIATION REF NUMBER: KR 5/2/8/200400332


1, Purpose

To brief you and the Portfolio Committee on the meetings held with the Ongeluksnek Farmer Association, subsequent to the meeting held with them on the 15th February 2005.


2 Background

The Ongeluksnek Farmers Association (OFA) approached the Portfolio Committee on Agriculture and Land Affairs complaining that they have not been part of the land claim by Chief Lebenya of Bakoena Tribe, and therefore seeking assistance from the Committee


2.2 Subsequently, the Portfolio Committee instructed the Commission on Restitution of Land Rights - Eastern Cape to hold a meeting with the Ongeluksnek Farmers Association to explain the restitution legislation and processes, and to come up with a fair and equitable solution.


Progress to-date

The first meeting was held on the 24th February 2005 with the Ongeluksnek Farmers Association Sdumo Trust and Umtata Land Reform Office in one of the farms in Ongeluksnek, in Matatiele (See the attached minutes of the meeting)


3.1.1 In this meeting, the Commission on Restitution of Land Rights together with Umtata Land Reform Office presented and explained the whole land reform programme and in particular the land claims process, and apologised earnestly for the misunderstanding and lack of proper communication to the farmers.


3.1.2 The farmers reiterated their position that they are not opposing the claim by the Bakoena Tribe but were concerned about the process that was followed, and requested the government to consider their plight as they have stayed in the farms for a long time and have nowhere else to go.


3.1.3 In contrary, the Sdumo Trust insisted that the claim by Chief Lebenya on behalf of Bakoena tribe was illegitimate considering the history of Ongeluksnek and requested us to provide them with documents pertaining to the validity of the claim. Documents including the research report were sent to them for their perusal and comments.


3.2 The second meeting was held on the 11th March 2005 and the purpose of the meeting was to discuss the merits and the validity of the claim and to get the factual basis for the claim to be declared "illegitimate" by Sdumo Trust.


3.2.1 The Farmers changed their stance and expressed their opposition to the claim on the basis of procedure and facts. They argued that the Commission did not adhere to Section 11 (1) of the Restitution of Land Rights Act, Act No. 22 of 1994, as amended. They feel that the gazetting of the claim was unprocedural and they should have been notified of the pending claim, as one of the stakeholders. They took exception to the fact that the Commission validated the claim by Bakoena Tribe without them given an opportunity to express their views on the claim.


3.2.2 The farmers made it very clear that they are not prepared to be relocated to any farms, and would like to stay where they are, no matter what. They want the State to leave them on the farms.


3.2.3 After lengthy deliberations on the matter, the farmers requested to be given time to think about the claim and its merits for validation, and proposed that they would make a written submission to the Regional Land Claims Commissioner.


4. General Observation


From the meetings attended with the farmers, the following observations were made:


4.1 The farmers are divided on their opposition of the claim. The majority of the farmers, more especially those coming from that area do accept and acknowledge that the Bakoena Tribe have a valid land claim as they occupied the land and were dispossessed of their land to the claimed land.


4.2 Those that are opposing the claim are the people who are coming from the other areas that were never affected by the dispossessions and removals, and would like to deny the people who suffered as a result of dispossession their right to restitution.


4.3 Some of the farmers would like to maintain the present status quo, and this would be done at all costs and at the expense of the people who lost right to the land.


5. Proposed Solution

After consultation with the Acting Director General of the Department of Land Affairs, Mr. Glen Thomas, the following was suggested, as a possible solution:


5.1 The sale of the Ongeluksnek should be withdrawn from the State Land Disposal Programme, and a submission should be made to the Minister requesting her to reverse the disposal process.


5.2 The processing of the land claim should proceed.


5.3 An alternative land should be sought and purchased by the State for the members of the Ongeluksnek Farmers Association, preferably farms in the same vicinity.


5.4 The Commission together with the Provincial Land Reform Office should write a letter of apology to the Ongeluksnek Farmers Association, and explaining to them the above proposals and the manner in which the matter would be resolved.

  1. At this stage the Commission is proceeding with the processing of the claim whilst awaiting a written submission opposing the claim, as stated by the community in the meeting of the 11th March 2005.


Ms. L. Faleni Regional Land Claims Commissioner: Eastern Cape Date