Mpumalanga farm dwellers reject land offer over grazing concerns

Mpumalanga farm dwellers, who had accused the government of improperly handing out their land to claimants, were recently given a portion of the same land, but refused, saying it was not enough. The squabble between the families residing at Theeboom Farm in Badplaas and the department of land reform and rural development started about three years ago after the Ginindza family, who were former settlers, successfully claimed the farm, while there were still people residing there. Residents got angry and challenged the matter after the new owners reportedly erected a fence on their cattle’s grazing land and permitted the construction of the shopping centre without their consent.

The irate dwellers have successfully challenged the authorities, which led to the current situation where they were given ownership of part of the land, including the land they are currently occupying. According to the Land Rights Inquiry report seen byThe Citizen, about 229 hectares of the about 1 000ha farm must be given to the 10 disgruntled families. The report said the proposed offer is in accordance with Section 4(1)(b) of the Extension of Security of Tenure Act 62 of 1997 and Section 26 (1) of the Labour Tenant Act 3 of 1996.

“The portion remaining of the Theeboom number 729 JS measuring 948 hectares is currently owned by Nkosi Ginindza Communal Property Association, which was acquired after a successful restitution claim. “The 10 families residing on the property and their security of tenure are legally insecure. The families arrived on the farm at different intervals and some were born on the farm.

[paywall]

“Their grandparents and parents were former workers of the erstwhile land owners Dannie Elmanman and Du Plessis, who later left the farm, and the families continue to reside and utilise the property and, in the process, accumulated land tenure rights.” In an interview withThe Citizenyesterday, James Vilane, a leader of the affected families, said they were worried that the offered land was small and proper grazing was not allocated. “They allocated 60ha for grazing and the area does not have rivers; the families have more than 200 cattle combined. We are, however, happy with the 169ha for human settlements,” said Vilane.

[/paywall]