SADC law binding
Written by KJW
Wednesday, 13 April 2011 06:58
Independent review ratifies land grab decision An independent review of the SADC Tribunal over the past six months has found that SADC law should be supreme over domestic laws, and all decisions made by the court should be binding and enforceable within all member states.
HARARE – The ruling by the SADC tribunal that President Robert Mugabe’s land grab policy was unlawful and discriminatory has been upheld by an independent review into the role of the regional court.Zimbabwe will be forced to abide by the ruling if recommendations into its workings are adopted by SADC leaders at the summit later this year.
After Zimbabwe refused to accept its ruling on the so-called “land reform programme”, the tribunal was suspended last year by SADC and a review ordered into its role, responsibilities and terms of reference. The review was conducted by WTI Advisors Ltd, Geneva, an affiliate of the World Trade Institute.
The court had upheld the complaints of 79 farmers in 2008, ruling that Mugabe’s land grab policy was racially discriminatory and unlawful. It ordered the government to protect the farmers, their rights to their land and pay compensation for land already seized.
The landmark case was taken to the tribunal by Chegutu farmer Mike Campbell, who died last week from injuries sustained during the violent land grab, and his son-in-law Ben Freeth. The review, which has been carried out over the past six months, ratified the court’s decisions. It found that SADC law should be supreme over domestic laws and constitutions and concludes that all decisions made by the court should be binding and enforceable within all member states.
The report also notes that, as a signatory to the SADC Treaty, Zimbabwe cannot argue that the Tribunal was not legally constituted when it had participated in the all of the proceedings of the tribunal and also nominated a judge for appointment. It states that the SADC Tribunal has the legal authority to deal with individual human rights petitions, that its rulings should be binding over member states and that the SADC ruling on the land grab issue “cannot be faulted” The report and its findings will be reviewed next week by the SADC Council of Ministers who will then forward their recommendations to the SADC Heads of State due to meet later this year.
There was widespread anger when the tribunal was suspended last year pending a review in what was seen as weakness by SADC countries to confront Mugabe for ignoring the ruling made on his land policy. The tribunal has been unable to hear any cases during the six months, while the review was ongoing.
Key findings
• The SADC Tribunal has the legal authority to deal with individual human rights petitions.
• SADC Community law should be supreme to domestic laws and constitutions.
• Decisions of the SADC Tribunal should be binding and enforceable within the territories of all SADC member states.
• The SADC Tribunal was legally established in terms of the SADC Tribunal Protocol.
• The SADC states waived the requirement to ratify the SADC Tribunal Protocol which became a part of the SADC Treaty by agreement and is binding on all SADC member states.
• Zimbabwe may not turn around to say the Tribunal was not legally constituted when they participated in all the proceedings of the SADC Tribunal and nominated a judge for appointment.
• A member State may not rely on its national laws (including norms of constitutional status) as a defense against a violation of an international obligation.