|
Whose land? Whose rights?
By David Mkwambisi, PhD
Two decades ago, people of Mwanza village, Chief Malili in Lilongwe district had land, beautiful forests, productive wetland areas and common culture. In the present day, the village that is 16kms away from the capital of Malawi has no meeting space, no freedom of movement, no institutional protection and of all, no rights to food and natural resources left by their ancestors.
Their land has been bought by the elite individuals and organisations whose interests are further than the natives. This agrarian paradigm has now widened to affect people of all cardinal points of peri-urban areas of Lilongwe city. The most affected area is that covered by Chief Malili.
This article covers some of the problems associated with land trade by poor communities, the weakness of our land policy and the socio-economic as well as ecological problems associated with this development. It then calls upon the government and the people of Lilongwe to stand and defend their land for the sake of future generations, peace, development and urban sustainability.
It is a given fact that most of the customary land around the city of Lilongwe has been purchased by high-income individuals and organisations. The evidence shows that currently the land policy fail to protect such vulnerable communities. It can also be justified here that those buying land are not following proper mechanisms and that the poor are forced to dispose off the land at prices that are below the market value. The sad thing is that even those who are not entitled to own land in this country have penetrated the rural areas.
This issue of pilfering land from the poor communities will not only increase number of people migrating to urban areas, but it has already impacted on the villages in many ways including their human rights. For example, most of wetland that was used for feeding livestock is now in private hands. Natural resources that used to support their livelihoods have been fenced. Cultural and traditional factors that brought together the people of Lilongwe rural have been destroyed causing several social implications. This has increased incidences of child labour, HIV and AIDS, early marriages as well as unwanted pregnancies.
While the national polices aim to empower rural communities through agriculture and sustainable use of natural resources, the current mechanism of buying land from the poor has increased environmental problems let alone breaking the norms of Chewa people.
For example, fertile land that used to feed residents of Lilongwe City has been turned into residential area included bars and garages. The only asset for people of Lilongwe has now been shared by people who have no interest to alleviate the problems faced by communities in the domain areas.
One policy implication with this approach is that soon or later poor communities will have no land as well as shelter. This will mean that both young and old people will migrate to urban areas for improved livelihoods. The sad thing is that Lilongwe city has already several problems on its table, including a failure to provide shelter to the poor people and to provide basic amenities to the poor.
Indeed this has now affected the human security that is supposed to be offered by the government. I do argue that human security is not only offered by the Military or the Police department. Human security covers environmental, economic, access to food, health at both national and community level. This sort of security has been weakened by the institutional failure to protect agricultural land from being bought by the elite.
This induced migration will have an impact on mothers and children as they depend on land for survival. While decisions are made by men, it can be argued here that these decisions of selling land are not considering future generation as well as implication at district as well as national scale.
In the development discourse, we understand that there is freedom from fear, freedom from hazards and freedom from want. Are these forms of freedom offered to the people of Lilongwe rural? Should communities fail to enjoy forms of freedoms because the government has no specific policies on land issues? Should rights to access land, rights to associate, rights to better accommodation and rights to resources be available to high-income people only?
Without accessing such freedoms, the people of these villages will resort to several coping and adaptation mechanisms. In addition to migrating to the city, some will be very harmful to land lords, while some will destroy the very environment we want to conserve. In actual fact, some will have impacts on other good practices such the agricultural subsidy programme, HIV and AIDS as well the food security policies.
The real fact is that women and children including future generations will feel the heat. This is particularly true knowing that vulnerability is quite high among women and children, We have already noted that even though the new landlords are offering employment, the conditions in which our cousins work, the amount of money they get can not be differentiated from slavery. Who will halt this?
The sad thing is that there is no single guideline from the government as well as the Members of Parliament on the same. Communities are selling land without knowing the actual market value of the resources. The cash realised for such transactions are not put into good use due to lack of capacity building at community level. Despite that we have seen several conflicts due to this wholesale disposal of customary land, our local leaders are not empowered enough to arrest the war.
There are several options here to reduce this problem. Firstly, there is need for a policy-oriented research that will understand several factors raised in this article. This research should aim to identify the buyers, total land sold, changes in market value, socio-economic and ecological impacts for both urban and rural people.
This research will generate data and facts that can be used to review the land policy as well the implementation of policy alternatives to regulate the process. Land is public good, so are the people, we can not allow to cast a blind eye when we all know that this can easily breed problems in the near future.
Secondly, there is need to raise awareness to the communities on social implication of selling land. This could be pioneered by human rights organisations, because the human rights of Lilongwe people are at stake here. Local chiefs, MPs, school children, church leader and all other stakeholders could bring this on the table for possible solutions. Thirdly, the Ministry of Land could immediately put in mechanisms that will reduce the sell of land by poor communities. This could be in the form of a press release or meetings with local leaders.
Fourthly, the people of Lilongwe, especially those who have been to school could defend their land and start introduced programmes that will reduce poverty. Finally, it should be a national concern on what is happening in Lilongwe peri-urban areas. In the long term, the outcome of this issue will not only affect people from Lilongwe, it will be a national problem that can easily yield several problems.
There is need for a review of all transactions that have resulted in the sell of customary land. This review should be chaired by a competent human right expert who will guide the nation on the way forward. Soon or later, the consequences will start showing signs. These signs will affect the strong development foundation that is being laid by the current government.
|