LAWYERS representing Zimbabwean farmers have requested the SADC Tribunal to recommend that SADC either terminate or suspend Zimbabwe's membership for ignoring an earlier Tribunal order to allow peaceful residence of over 70 farmers and farmworkers on their farms.
The Southern African Development Community (SADC) is holding a summit meeting in Windhoek next month.
Should the SADC Tribunal grant the application, the regional heads of state would have to handle this hot potato of calling Zimbabwe to order.
The application was brought by Zimbabwean commercial farmers Louis Fick, Michael Campbell and Richard Etheredge, the Commercial Farmers' Union of Zimbabwe and the Southern African Commercial Farmers' Alliance, Zimbabwe branch.
No legal team of the Zimbabwe government was present at the Tribunal yesterday.
The farmers won a Tribunal ruling in December 2008 but the Zimbabwean government has ignored it up to now and physical violence and intimidation of the farmers and their workers is continuing.
Last year the farmers approached the SADC Tribunal again, asking it to declare the Zimbabwe government in breach of the SADC Treaty for failing to comply with its earlier ruling.
The Tribunal granted the application and referred the matter to the 2009 SADC summit, but nothing came of it.
"If the tribunal says 'no' to us, this could send a terrible message to the world and if the [upcoming] SADC summit decides to do nothing [about Zimbabwe] again, the world attention would be on the summit," Senior Counsel Jeremy Gauntlett told the three Tribunal judges yesterday.
According to Gauntlett, it was critical that the functions of the SADC Tribunal should be respected.
A second breach, in his view, was that Zimbabwe failed to register the 2008 Tribunal ruling in its domestic court as the SADC Treaty stipulates.
"If a SADC member state in breach of the treaty can say that a treaty does not conform with its domestic laws and this [view] is allowed and a country can shield behind this argument and use it as an escape clause for any domestic court, the SAC Tribunal rulings will come to nothing," Gauntlett said.
Justice Ariranga Govindasamy Pillay of Mauritius, who chaired the hearing, reserved judgement. The other two judges were Justice Isaac Jamu Mtambo of Malawi and Justice Luis Antonio Mondlane of Mozambique.
Comments 1 to 5 of 11 Post a comment
Brigittes article is interesting, but fundamentally flawed. She accurately states that the issue regarding former white Zimbabwean farmers is a Hot Potato for SADC. It is especially a hot potato and liability for Zimbabwean politicians. This hot potato issue is not just a Zimbabwean problem but is a much bigger problem in South Africa regarding land issues. To begin with colonialist ignored the laws set up by chiefs and elders in region regarding land. They white colonialist did as they pleased. It is my strong belief that land issues in Zimbabwe will never be solved thru a court of law.
The lawyer for the white farmers suggests that Zimbabwe be suspended, a wildly crazy idea. Who in SADC will vote for that kind of law? I strongly doubt it. Zimbabwe did not show up for tribunal proceedings because it has withdrawn its tribunal membership. Zimbabwe objective to the SADC tribunal because the treaty does not conform to Zimbabwe domestic policies. The tribunal eventually came to their senses recently by ignoring white farm pleas for fast track movement of this issue.
The EU now fully accepts Zimbabwe land reform program and is investing millions of dollars already. Recent reports from the UN and South African University researchers concluded that Land reform in Zimbabwe has been very positive indeed. The study confirms progress. In addition, South Africa papers are also reporting progressive.
I don't know why the Zanugoons even bother with elections or even courts neither is free and impartial,Zimbabwe will never amount to anything without a rule of law.
Allan, the so-called rule-of all can mean one thing to one person and mean a totally different thing to another person. White land grabbers never thought of the so-called rule of law when creating deplorable reserves for the so-called natives. Thousands of villagers forced to move to create white only sections of Zimbabwe. Chiefs badly humiliated and forced to farm for the white man that was another version of rule of law.
Allan, the rule-of-law has changed now It is the majority deciding how land will be farmed and managed and who will own the farms. The same thing happened in the colonial era. Get over it, Zimbabwe is merely exercising its own version of the rule of law..Africa this..Africa that..bla..bla Africa that will not change land laws in Zimbabwe
I won't be holding my breath about the sadc ruling, what would it achieve, jack shit. Mugabe put pen to paper to abide by the rulings in Sadc and just done the complete opposite. Yet the region wants to bed mates with ZanuPf. There is no rule of law in Zimbabwe, if here was Mugabe would abide by the regions rulings to which he is a part. Bob can go to hell and let all Zimbabweans get on and live the way we should do.
Please people of zimbabwe do not give in keep your land at all cost, you fought to gain control of your country please do not give it back. The people of china will never allow a whitge man to do this to them, because they would fight the united states and europe if they tried to take it. SOUTH AFRICA IS LOST TO WHITE AND THE UNITED STATES. YOU CANNOT BUY LAND IN OTHER COUNTRIES THROUGH OUT THW WORLD, YOU MAY LEASE IT, AND THE LEAQSE IS UP THE COUNTRIES HAS THE RIGHTS NOT TO RENEW THE LEASE. THE LAND BELONG TO THE ZIMBABWE PEOPLE NOT THE GOVERNMENT. PLEASE TELL THESE WHITE TO GO BACK TO ENGLAND AND TAKE MORGAN TGE CORRUPT ONE WITH THEM.
See All Comments