Report of the
Select Committee on Land and Environmental Affairs on the Annual Report for 2008/2009
of the Commission on Restitution of Land Rights, dated 1 September 2009:
The Select
Committee on Land and Environmental Affairs, having considered the Annual Report and Financial Statements for 2008/2009 of the
Commission on Restitution of Land Rights, reports as follows:
1.
Introduction
On 11 August 2009, the Select Committee met
with the Land Claims Commission to discuss its Annual Report and Financial Statements for 2008/2009.The Commission
presented to the Select Committee on the following:
·
Purpose of Restitution – Strategic Objectives
·
Complex Claims
·
Business Process - Strategic Partnerships
·
Business Process – Support for Struggling Projects
·
Finalisation of outstanding claims
·
Challenges and Strategies
·
Budget breakdowns for the following years:
o
2010 / 11
o
2011 / 12
o
2012 / 13
2.
Deliberations by
the Committee
2.1. The Committee engaged the Commission
on the high vacancy rate in the Eastern
implemented. The Committee requested the
Commission to forward its staff
retention strategy.
2.2. The Commission was queried
about parcels of land that were not yet identified by
the Department of Public Works as state
assets, and how this affected restitution
claims.
2.3. The Committee asked why
statistics showed that the bulk of the remaining claims
were rural, which raised the question about
the settlement of urban claims?
2.4. In answering the Committee’s
question, the Commission indicated that feasibility
studies were conducted on all donated land
received for the purpose of restitution.
2.5. It was agreed that the Community
Property Associations (CPA) should be
reviewed and that legislation would be
required to effect these changes. The
Commission raised the issue of Community
Property Associations and its
implementation in communally owned land,
as the traditional tribal authorities were
not adequately included in the restitution
process.
2.6. A question as to what assistance
was given to claimants, who are acquiring mineral
rights to land that they received under
the Land Restitution Act was discussed.
2.7. The Committee discussed
support given to land claimants for food security and
which departments were responsible for
this particular function.
3.
Challenges
identified
3.1. The Committee and the Commission
engaged each other on the issue of land
restitution vs. financial compensation. There
was a concern that some
commissioners coerced claimants into
accepting financial compensation rather
than pursue land claims.
As
stated in the Restitution Act, the Commissioners made both options available to
claimants, for their independent
decision on which course of action to pursue. The
Commission
stated that some claimants, especially old people, prefer to take
financial compensation instead of being
uprooted a second time.
3.2. The Committee inquired about
the delay in finalising the proposed amendments to
the Expropriation Act.
The Commission stated that the process
was not finalised due to lack of public
consultation,
and that the Bill is the responsibility of the Department of Public
Works.
3.3. The Committee expressed concern
on the slow pace of settlements of claims.
The Commission responded by outlining
the challenges experienced with complex
claims and difficultly in retaining
staff.
3.4 The Committee was not
pleased with the statement made by the Commission in
their presentation document, stating that
a savings was made due to good
planning. The Committee was of the
opinion that the money should have been
utilised, in light of the fact that there
are still many claims outstanding.
4.
Resolution
4.1
The Committee resolved that:
·
the Commission should
forward to the committee a report with the breakdown of the 200 struggling
projects, per province and the amount of money allocated to the projects within
14 days.
·
the Commission should forward a report on it’s Human
Resource Retention
Strategy to the Committee.
Report to be considered.