The tabling of the new land bill on 1 October was a watershed moment, yet it should not proceed without an immediate and comprehensive land audit.
This bill takes a monumental legislative leap: it repeals the entire Agricultural (Commercial) Land Reform Act 1995, effectively wiping two decades of legal precedent off the table.
Yet, parliament is attempting to push this compete overhaul without first auditing why the old system failed.
CRITICAL QUESTIONS
Follow us on WhatsApp | LinkedIn for the latest headlines
The bill's central enforcement mechanism is Article 110 ('Beneficial Use'), which mandates compulsory productivity on all allocated land within 90 days, under penalty of cancellation of tenure.
This transforms resettlement from ownership into a conditional lease.
How can this new, aggressive standard be fairly enforced if we haven't answered the following critical historical questions?
- Scope of Failure: How many farms were bought, how many farmers were resettled, and critically, how many resettlement farms currently lie derelict by region? (Previous acquisitions left 30 farms or an estimated 225 000 hectares unutilised in the //Kharas region alone; what is the national figure?)
- Economic Viability: Are too many beneficiaries being resettled on a single tract of land, making it economically unviable to farm?
- Equity and Allocation: What is the ethnic composition of resettlement farmers by region, and how many farms have been allocated to local residents versus Namibians from other regions?
- Integration Success: What is the success rate (or lack thereof) at which resettlement farmers have integrated into commercial agriculture and are now commercial food producers?
POLICY RISKS
The absence of historical data exacerbates the bill's inherent policy risks:
- Internal Injustice: Without audit data, the political promise of 'equality' risks being built on new policies that merely redistribute idleness or favour specific groups, especially as the bill strengthens communal rights (chapter 2) for the rural majority.
- Contradictory Policy: The bill simultaneously bans foreign nationals from acquiring commercial land - cutting off a source of capital - while ignoring the core issue of productivity failure among existing local beneficiaries. We must address internal bias and land idleness before focusing on external restrictions.
- Unworkable Incentives: The bill establishes compensation for improvements to encourage long-term investment, but this clause is meaningless if the state cannot even define or measure "success" in the first place.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
ACCOUNTABILITY
The time for historical data is before the new law is passed.
The relevant parliamentary committee must use its subpoena power to immediately compel the production of the resettlement farm register and productivity data.
The findings must be made public immediately to ensure the full truth informs parliamentary debates.
Restorative justice demands accountability, not merely acquisition. Voters deserve data on justice versus work.
It is astounding that the government, or rather the state, still considers itself qualified and trustworthy in light of: Fuelrot, Fishrot, SME Bank collapse, the Government Institutions pension Fund's missing millions, and low foreign direct investment and poor fixed investment rates.
Accountability can only be delivered through an impartial, independent land audit.
- Frederick Kotze, an average Namibian who wants Namibia to succeed for everyone. Sometimes that means going against the flow.
The Namibian uses AI tools to assist with improved quality, accuracy and efficiency, while maintaining editorial oversight and journalistic integrity.
