Supreme Court allows ongoing, unlawful, farm invasions
By Alex Bell
29 November 2010
The Supreme Court has effectively given the all clear for unlawful land
invasions to continue across the country, after dismissing an urgent
application for a moratorium on farm seizures to be put in place.
The application was filed by the Commercial Farmers Union (CFU) in an
attempt to halt the land seizures, by asking the Court to stop the ongoing
prosecution of white farmers, whose only crime has been to remain on the
properties they own. The CFU’s President Deon Theron explained to SW Radio
Africa on Monday that there are only a handful of white farmers left in
Zimbabwe, and the moratorium was to give them breathing space until the land
issue in the country was sorted out.
The remaining commercial farmers have been under almost constant siege
despite the formation of the unity government, which promised to protect the
property rights of all Zimbabweans. Farmers have continued to lose land and
have been hauled before the courts time and time again, facing accusations
of refusing to leave so called ‘State land’. Theron said the situation has
become “straight persecution not just prosecution anymore.” He said it is
clearly a “racial issue, because only white farmers are being targeted in
this way.”
But on Friday Supreme Court Chief Justice Godfrey Chidyausiku dismissed the
CFU application with costs, saying the applicants had failed to prove the
racial grounds behind the appeal for a moratorium. He also said that CFU
could not prove that any black farmers were staying on their land ‘illegally’.
“They cannot be heard to complain that only white commercial farmers are
being prosecuted. What is the Attorney-General supposed to do if it is only
white farmers who are breaking the law?” Chidyausiku said.
He added: “It is an abuse of court process for the applicants to approach
this court seeking an interdict against the AG in these circumstances.”
Chidyausiku said the farmers should simply obey the law by vacating
‘acquired’ land.
”If they have any legal claim to the acquired land, or arising from the
acquired land, they can launch proceedings after vacating the acquired land
as is required by law. I, therefore, find that the applicants’ complaint has
no substance,” he said.
The Chief Justice also made it clear that the 2008 regional ruling,
declaring the land grab campaign unlawful, held no power in Zimbabwe, saying
the Supreme Court’s decision was final and was not bound or influenced by
the Southern African Development Community (SADC) Tribunal.
The Tribunal in 2008 ordered the government to compensate farmers who had
lost their land because of the land grab. The government was also ordered to
protect the property rights of the remaining commercial farmers, saying in
its ruling that the land grab was inherently racist. But the government has
openly dismissed the Tribunal’s judgments, calling them ‘null and void’,
despite being bound by SADC Treaty law to respect the court. SADC leaders
meanwhile earlier this year chose to stand by their allegiance to Robert
Mugabe by not taking action against Zimbabwe for refusing to honour the
Tribunal. The Tribunal, instead, was effectively suspended.
The CFU’s Theron said on Monday that he is not surprised by the Supreme
Court’s decision, saying “we knew that the same attitude would persist.” But
he said their lawyers are examining the official court documents, and “we
will continue to seek legal recourse, even if the courts no longer respect
the rule of law.”
Meanwhile, a high court judge has been challenged to admit that he occupies
former white-owned land seized part of the land grab, which has benefited
only Mugabe’s friends, family and loyalists.
Lawyer Beatrice Mtetwa said that high court judge Chinembiri Bhunu had been
asked to confirm if he had been allocated one or more farms under Mugabe’s
land grab, and to supply details of how long he had been in occupation. He
had been also asked to disclose if the former white owner had been
compensated.