Briefing by Land Claims Commissioner; Marine Living Resources Amendment Bill: deliberations

Meeting report

****************************************************************
This Report is a Contact Natural Resource Information Service
Taking Parliament to People, and People to Parliament
****************************************************************
Select Committee on Environmental and Land Affairs
7 November 2000
Briefing by Chief Land Claims Commissioner and deliberations on Marine Living Resources Amendment Bill [B68 of 2000]

Documents handed out:
Report to the Select Committee on Land and Environmental Affairs (NCOP): A National Profile of the Restitution Process in South Africa
Commission on the Restitution of Land Rights: Memorandum from Mpumalanga and Northern Province
Presentation by the Commission on the Restitution of Land Rights - November 2000
Proposed Amendment to Bill B68 of 2000

SUMMARY
Adv. Wallace Mgoqi, the Chief Land Claims Commissioner, briefed the Select Committee on Environmental and Land Affairs on the current status of land restitution in South Africa. The Committee then deliberated on the Marine Living Resources Amendment Bill [B68 of 2000] and subsequently approved the Bill.

MINUTES
The Chair, Rev P. Moatshe (ANC) introduced Adv. W Mgoqi, the Chief Land Claims Commissioner for South Africa. His presentation can be found in Appendix 1.

Questions:
Rev. Chabaku (ANC) commented that the Committee is concerned with the grouping of Gauteng and the NorthWest Province into one Regional Commission. In her experience these are two of the most diverse provinces when it comes to land. She personally has also submitted a claim that crosses provincial boundaries. Who will take jurisdiction over this case? She also agreed that the Commission staff of 184 is not nearly enough for them to perform their job.

Mrs. Vilakazi (IFP) stated that she was worried about the extremely poor results in the Free State, the North West and Mpumalanga. What is the reason behind these poor numbers?

Mr. Taabe (ANC) asked whether a new commissioner had been picked for Mpumalanaga.

Adv. Mgoqi answered that the figures in the documents are not completely accurate, but they are close. The appointment of the Commissioner is a Ministerial responsibility, and the process is moving along. The Commission will be establishing new offices in Petersburg and in Nelspruit. No longer will Commissioners run the regional offices from Pretoria as was the case. Another staffing problem besides the lack thereof is that they are given one year contracts so the turnover is extremely high. This has created many organizational difficulties.

One of the members commented that there have been complaints that once a claim has been filed there is no longer any contact with the Commission's officials. Is this the case? He also stated that he had heard of an NGO who worked to try and help communities file claims. Has the commission worked with this NGO, and what is the possibility of replicating its work elsewhere?

Mr. Taabe (ANC) stated that the members were not pleased that the process of choosing a commissioner has been to look at the list of candidates from the last selection process (three months ago), and choose from amongst those who were not offered positions in the first round.

Adv. Mgoqi stated that the officials are supposed to maintain frequent contact with the claimants. They have formed project teams based on geography to help in this regard. The NGO "Nkosi" is an affiliate of the National Land Committee and has a good working relationship with the Commission. Nkosi is an example of an integrated approach to land claims issues.

Marine Living Resources Amendment Bill [B68 of 2000]
The Bill was presented to the Committee by Mr. Horst Kleinschmidt, the Director of Marine Coastal Management at the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT). He began by stating that the aim of the legislation was to extend the power of the Minster to grant licenses for fishing and other industry business. This will facilitate the continued development of new plans which the DEAT has begun to improve the adjudication process of license allocation. This legislation will provide the industry with stability while the changes are being made. The Director emphasized that this is a very limited piece of legislation.

Ms. Versfeld (DP) stated that she wished to propose an amendment to the legislation. Under the rules of a Section 75 Bill (which this one had been re-tagged after initially been deemed a Section 76 Bill) the Select Committee can propose amendments to the Portfolio Committee to consider. Ms. Versfeld was concerned that this legislation would automatically grant rights to those who had already held them. This would include those who should not have received them in the first place. She supports the notion that industry needs to go ahead but fears that there has been corruption that needs to be examined. Her amendment was as follows:

Add a section (c) onto 6 (a) and (b) which reads:

"Where evidence of irregularity relating to the allocation of any fishing rights and/or evidence of participation in the destruction of any marine resource, such fishing rights should immediately be suspended, pending the findings of a Judicial Committee of Inquiry or the findings of a court."

Ms. Versfeld (DP) continued that she knew of NGOs who were planning to take this issue to the Constitutional Court if it were not resolved through the legislative process. These court challenges could affect the industry even more, for the fourth time in as many years.

Mr. Mokoena (ANC) stated that it seems that Ms. Versfeld's amendment should be to the original act rather than to the Amendment to the act. What she is saying is important but it is not the right forum to raise the issue.

The Chair stated that he agreed with the Mr. Mokoena and that it seemed the Committee was in agreement on this issue.

Ms. Versfeld (DP) made the point that it was incredible that the Committee could spend two hours on a briefing by the Land Claims Commissioner, allow every member to ask as many questions as they wished, but that on a Bill to be approved they spent ten minutes and would not allow the State Law Advisors to answer her questions. She asked the committee to at least listen to the point she was making.

At this point the Chair cut off debate and called a vote party by party. All were in favour of the Bill except for the DP who abstained. The Select Committee approved the Bill.

The meeting was adjourned.

The copyright in this material subsists with the Contact Trust. Further distribution or copying of this material is prohibited without the prior agreement of the Contact Trust.
___________________________________________________________________Appendix 1
REPORT TO THE SELECT COMMITTEE ON LAND AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS (NCOP)
A NATIONAL PROFILE OF THE RESTITUTION PROCESS IN SOUTH AFRICA.

1. INTRODUCTION
THE RESTITUTION PROCESS IN SOUTH AFRICA IS IN ITS SIXTH YEAR NOW, SINCE IT STARTED WITH THE PASSAGE OF THE RESTITUTION OF LAND RIGHTS ACT. 22 OF 1994, THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COMMISSION IN MARCH 1995 AND THE COMMENCEMENT OF THE LODGEMENT OF LAND CLAIMS IN MAY 1995.

2. THE LODGEMENT PERIOD
THE LODGEMENT PERIOD WAS ORIGINALLY MEANT TO RUN FOR THREE YEARS, FROM MAY 1995 UNTIL APRIL 1998. HOWEVER, DUE TO APPEALS FROM THE WIDER PUBLIC AND LAND NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANISATIONS, PARLIAMENT ENACTED AN EXTENSION OF THE PERIOD UNTIL DECEMBER 1998.

3. THE AWARENESS CAMPAIGN
THIS WAS CHARACTERISED BY A VIGOROUS COUNTRYWIDE AWARENESS CAMPAIGN, COVERING EVERY INCH OF SOUTH AFRICAN SOIL, PRINTED MEDIA_, AND TELEVISION, TO INFORM THE USING RADIO, THE PUBLIC, IN GENERAL AND POTENTIAL CLAIMANTS, IN PARTICULAR, THAT THE CUT-OFF DATE HAD BEEN EXTENDED TO 31 DECEMBER, 1998.

THE LODGEMENT AWARENESS CAMPAIGN WAS A RESOUNDING SUCCESS, AS IT BROUGHT IN APPROXIMATELY THIRTY THOUSAND (30, 000) CLAIMS INTO THE PROCESS BY 31 DECEMBER 1998.

4. THE PREVIOUS REPORT
THE LAST REPORT, ON THE RESTITUTION PROCESS WAS PRESENTED TO THE
PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE IN THE FORM OF THE ANNUAL REPORT, MARCH 2000.

THAT REPORT REFLECTED, AMONG OTHER THINGS, THAT WHILST THE
RESTITUTION PROCESS HAD BEEN PAINFULLY SLOW OVER THE FIRST FOUR YEARS, IT HAS BEEN CHARACTERISED BY MUCH FASTER DELIVERY SINCE JUNE 1999.

OVER THIS PERIOD, JUNE 1999 UNTIL MARCH 2000, THERE WAS AN EXPONENTIAL INCREASE IN THE PACE OF DELIVERY FROM 41 CLAIMS IN FOUR YEARS TO 3916 CLAIMS SIX MONTHS LATER.

5. MAJOR STRIDES IN THE RESTITUTION
IT IS A FACT THAT MAJOR QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE STRIDES HAVE BEEN MADE IN THE PAST SIX MONTHS, (APRIL - SEPTEMBER 2000) IN ADVANCING RESTITUTION DELIVERY.

THERE IS A CONTINUING INCREASE IN THE PACE OF DELIVERY. BY MARCH 2000, 3916 CLAIMS HAD BEEN SETTLED, 220 CLAIMS HAD BEEN REJECTED.

BY THE END OF SEPTEMBER 2000, SIX MONTHS LATER, 6,525 CLAIMS HAD
BEEN SETTLED IN FAVOUR OF CLAIMANTS.

THE TOTAL NUMBER OF CLAIM FORMS RESOLVED IS 6 740. A BREAKDOWN OF
FINALISED CLAIMS PER PROVINCE IS AS FOLLOWS:
2897 EASTERN CAPE
1 FREE STATE
1816 GAUTENG
419 KWAZULU-NATAL
9 NORTHERN CAPE
1 MPUMALANGA
361 NORTH WEST
2 NORTHERN PROVINCE
1024 WESTERN CAPE

6. RESTITUTION COST
THE COST OF RESTITUTION HAS AMOUNTED TO THE FOLLOWING:
LAND COST - R131,073 MILLION
MONETARY COMPENSATION - R144,596 MILLION

7. HECTARES OF LAND RESTORED
LAND RESTORED BY ORDERS OF THE LAND CLAIMS COURT AMOUNTS TO
173,805 HECTARES.

LAND RESTORED BY MINISTERIAL APPROVAL (ACCORDING TO THE POWERS VESTED IN THE MINISTER IN TERMS OF SECTION 42 D OF THE RESTITUTION OF
LAND RIGHTS ACT, 22 OF 1994, AS AMENDED) AMOUNTS TO 94,501 HECTARES. THE TOTAL HECTARES OF LAND RESTORED IS 268,306 HECTARES.

8.RESTITUTION TARGETS FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR ENDING MARCH₁ 2001.
IN THE INTEREST OF ADVANCING THE RESTITUTION PROCESS IN A PROGRAMMATIC MANNER, THE COMMISSION HAS FOR THE FIRST TIME SET ITSELF BENCHMARKS, OTHER THAN THE NUMBER OF CLAIMS SETTLED. THESE ARE NOT ONLY QUANTITATIVE, BUT ALSO QUALITATIVE BENCHMARKS.

THE AIM IS TO INCREASE THE PRESENT FIGURE IN TERMS OF THE NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS TO 100,000 HOUSEHOLDS BY MARCH 2001.

TO INCREASE THE PRESENT NUMBER OF BENEFICIARIES OF THE RESTITUTION PROCESS TO 250,000 BENEFICIARIES BY MARCH 2001.

TO INCREASE THE PRESENT NUMBER OF HECTARES OF RESTORED LAND TO 500,000 HECTARES BY MARCH 2001.

9. THE QUALITY OF SETTLEMENTS
QUALITATIVELY, SETTLEMENTS ARE CHARACTERISED BY LINKING
RESTITUTION, AND THE RESTORATION OF LAND, WITH DEVELOPMENT. THIS
MAY TAKE THE FORM OF RESTORATION OF LAND IN SERVICED SITES, WITH
BENEFICIARIES HAVING AN OPPORTUNITY TO PARTICIPATE IN A HOUSING DEVELOPMENT. IN OTHER CASES, ESPECIALLY RURAL CLAIMS, THE
CLAIMANTS MAY HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY WITH REGARD TO AGRICULTURAL
DEVELOPMENT. YET IN OTHER INFRASTRUCTURAL DEVELOPMENT, SUCH AS WATER RETICULATION ELECTRIFICATION/TELEPHONES, CASES THE SETTLEMENT MAY INVOLVE, ROADS, FENCING, CREATION OF COMMUNITY
FACILITIES, SUCH AS SCHOOLS, CLINICS₁ MULTI-PURPOSE COMMUNITY HALLS.