Land invasions at “Knoflokskraal” site in the Grabouw plantation; with Minister

Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

13 September 2022
Chairperson: Ms F Muthambi (ANC)
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

Video

In a virtual meeting, the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and Environment, along with the South African Police Services, briefed the Portfolio Committee on the organised land invasions at Knoflokskraal. The Minister was in attendance.

The situation was that Knoflokskraal, the piece of land near Grabouw that over 4 000 people have illegally occupied, was now unsavable for forestry purposes. Minister Barbara Creecy discussed the complicated situation. She said that the Department obtained a court order to prevent further land invasions during lockdown, but that did not stop the land invasions. The Department's plan to implement community forestry as in its masterplan was held back because the community of Knoflokskraal did not agree to it. This destroyed the opportunity for many jobs to be created, as well as potential economic activity.

The Department and Public Works have since deployed a reasonable amount of resources to limit the spread of land invasions in the Highlands part of Grabouw plantations. It was also worth noting that Court processes are lengthy and may result in an order requiring the Department to provide alternative land when the eviction order is finally granted. Notwithstanding the efforts and resources used, land invasions continue to spread to adjacent properties resulting in irreversible damage to the plantations. This impacts the Department's ability to implement the Commercial Forestry Masterplan, which strives to ensure that all forestry areas are brought back into production through collaboration with the industry. Due to these invasions, the DFFE, as the user Department, has no option but to consider releasing this land back to the DPWI, the land owner.

The South African Police services reported that the types of crimes reported from the area were crimes of trespassing and public violence. The challenges that the police are facing are the reluctance of potential witnesses to give statements and the identification of legal owners of the land.

Members of the Committee were unhappy with the land being returned to the Department of Public Works and Infrastructure. They raised many questions about the way forward for the people of Knoflokskraal. Finding alternative land seemed to be a solution. Other Members argued that homeless and landless people in the Western Cape and South Africa should find land anywhere and occupy it. They said that the police must keep law and order, and prevent evictions and those denying people their birthright of a place to stay.

Members also noted that the Department presented the community with an opportunity to participate in community forestry, but the community refused. What are the community’s reasons for turning down the offer of community forestry? What other support would be given to the community?

The South African Police Services (SAPS) were also confronted on the role they failed to play in stopping the invasions. Members also wanted to know how many cases were opened, and what progress these cases have made.

It was agreed that a joint meeting with DPWI should be held soon, and then the Department can also update the Portfolio Committee on the progress of handing the land back to DPWI.

Meeting report

Opening Remarks by the Chairperson

The Chairperson opened the virtual meeting, welcoming the Members, support staff and guest delegates from the Department of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries and the South African Police Services. She also welcomed the Minister.

She recounted that the Committee had a meeting with the Department on 24 May 2022. At that meeting, the Department told the Committee about the transformation of the forestry sector, and the challenges that the Department is facing in forestry. There was a presentation on the status and ownership of the plantations, and the status of the land claims, including the lease agreement. The Committee then discussed the land invasions in the forest areas, and moved to create a community forest association. The challenges that the forestry branch faced included the workforce's ageing and ailing, timber theft, and land invasions. The Committee asked the Department about the land and plantation forest in Grabouw. At that meeting, the Committee asked about an alternative land for the people, and whether the illegal occupation of land was planned. This current meeting is a follow-up to that meeting.

The Department is going to brief the Committee today on the progress of the investigation of the planned land invasions at the Knoflokskraal site, in Grabouw. The South African Police Services (SAPS) will also update the Committee on the status of their investigations into the planned invasions at Knoflokskraal. Landlessness exists in the country, but the country is governed by the rule of law. This is why SAPS has to come in and reinforce, and keep law and order. The previous meeting also showed that the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment (DFFE) is responsible for the direct management of the 24 000 hectares in the Western Cape. The lease agreement of the private commercial companies, which ended in 2019, was also discussed. There were talks that the Department plans to retain these areas, and that the forestry production is in line with the commission forestry plan – which promotes growth and investment in the sector. It is a total of 7 000 hectares that is being discussed, and it includes the Grabouw plantation. Almost 4 000 households have invaded and are living on the Grabouw plantation. These areas are where forestry land is changed to agricultural use. The Department said it would investigate to see if communities are interested in community forestry agreements other than those currently living on the land. The Chairperson asked to hear a progress update on this matter.

Minister’s Remarks

Ms Barbara Creecy, Minister of Forestry, Fisheries & the Environment, stated that this particular area falls under the category of B and C forests, and it is the forests that the Department would like to put up for lease. Where possible, the Department would want to enter into Community Forestry Agreements with landless community members interested in participating in forestry. The Deputy Minister launched the first community forestry agreement, and the Department is very keen to work on the category B and C forests. Part of the agreement is to find a private forestry partner in the industry who is positioned to replant the land and offer the community an agreement once the trees have reached maturity. This is the sort of model that the Department is looking for. When community forestry agreements are entered into, the situation is open to those who have historical connections with the land. The Department is not asking for title deeds, as people who would possibly have historical connections with the land could be forestry workers themselves, agricultural workers, or people who have historical connections with certain pieces of the land – which, in this case, are the Khoi and the San being associated with the Knoflokskraal area. This land was historically taken away from their communities by the colonisers. The DFFE is not responsible for land restitution, local government, safety, or security. This matter is complicated, and there are a lot of factors to consider when it comes to solving this situation.

The invasion of the land happened during the lockdown. In terms of the lockdown regulations, people could not be evicted. The Department then got a court order to prevent further invasion of the land, and worked together with the Department of Public Works and Infrastructure (DPWI) to place security on the land. The invasions continued throughout the lockdown period. DFFE had a meeting with DPWI, and DFFE indicated that it wanted to use the land for forestry but that could only happen if the occupants left. The Minister was not very invested in this plan but, in the end, it was agreed upon that some legal processes have to be taken. DFFE also has to work together with DPWI to contain the land invasion.

Earlier this year, the Minister had a meeting with representatives of the community that had invaded the land, and members of the Khoi and the San Council were present. At that meeting, the Minister told them that the Department would be happy to enter into a community forestry agreement. She also wanted to know whether the community would be interested in participating in forestry. It was a difficult meeting because many other issues were raised, such as the land rights of the first nation. Different UN Charters were also cited. In the meeting, the Department did advise that the South African Constitution does not recognise the first nation but recognises land rights to all South Africans. It also recognises that people have been deprived of their land. After that meeting, the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform set up a committee to investigate the land rights of the Khoi and the San communities. It is working with that committee on that matter. The DFFE can only be involved in this matter if those on the land are interested in forestry.

When the proposal for community forestry was given to the community, the Department also met with the Theewaterskloof Local Municipality (TWK) mayor. They discussed that, if the Department is going to engage in the community forestry agreement, they would also want the agreement of the municipality. The Department would also want the TWK to make land available for those not interested in being part of forestry activities. That was the last time the Department engaged with the community and the municipality. Numerous attempts have been made to set up a follow-up meeting, but it was concluded that the community has no interest in community forestry agreements. There is also no interest from the municipality in the agreement for community forestry or in providing alternative land for people to live on.

It is no longer possible to conduct forestry on this land, as 4 000 people live there. Even in this situation, the DFFE has no other option but to return the land to its owner, DPWI.

Briefing by the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

A presentation on the land invasions in Grabouw was given by Ms Pumeza Nodada, Acting Deputy Director-General: Forestry, DFFE. She said that the DFFE is responsible for direct management of about 24 000ha in the Western Cape. The private commercial company previously managed these areas in a lease agreement that ended in 2019. The DFFE plans to retain these areas under forestry production in line with the Commercial Forestry Masterplan, which promotes growth and investment in the sector. The growth aspect encompasses transformation and job creation. In December 2020, the plantations in the Grabouw and Kluitjieskraal were invaded by the Khoisan community. DFFE, as the user Department, reported the matter to the Department of Public Works and Infrastructure (DPWI), the property owner. The owner Department initiated the court process which resulted in the containment order.

The DPWI is currently providing security at the site and there is an agreement between the two departments on sharing costs to ensure the area's protection. On 30 March 2022, the DFFE and DPW&I DGs held their first engagement to discuss collaboration on matters related to land invasions in the Western Cape. This was followed by a number of technical meetings between the officials in the two Departments to implement the decisions taken by the DGs. Based on these, the Departments are collaborating on ensuring that the current containment order is extended to include properties that were not previously part of the court order. The DPWI will deploy tactical security, with DFFE responsible for funding the operations.

The two Departments have since deployed a reasonable amount of resources to limit the spread of land invasions in the Highlands part of Grabouw plantations. It was also worth noting that court processes are lengthy and may result in an order requiring the Department to provide alternative land when the eviction order is finally granted. Notwithstanding the efforts and resources used, land invasions continue to spread to adjacent properties resulting in irreversible damage to the plantations. This impacts the Department's ability to implement the Commercial Forestry Masterplan, which strives to ensure all forestry areas are brought back into production through collaboration with the industry. Due to these invasions, the DFFE, as the user Department, has no option but to consider releasing this land back to the DPWI, the land owner. This can be implemented through Section 50 (3), which provides for Minister responsible for Forestry to release land that is no longer suitable or required for forestry back to the owner Department. The Department will be commencing with the engagements with DPWI on the matter to ensure that release of land is achieved within this financial year.

[See presentation document for more details]

Briefing by the South African Police Services

An invitation was received by the SAPS, addressed to the Minister of Police, to brief the Committee with an update on the land invasion in Grabouw scheduled for Tuesday, 13 September 2022. The presentation was delivered by Lieutenant-General Thembisile Patekile, Western Cape Commissioner.

Background: the first person to set up an informal structure in Knoflokskraal was Richard Isaacs from Genadendal. He claimed it was his area as his mother’s maiden surname was Haas. The surname “Haas” is unique to the Khoisan clan. He also recruited people from the Cape Flats to erect illegal structures in Knoflokskraal. This was reported to the Department by the Station Commander of Grabouw SAPS. The SAPS dealt with the alleged cases of crime that happened within Knoflokskraal. It also assisted the sheriff of the court, and the securities appointed with demolishing half erected structures and/or unoccupied dwellings.

The types of crimes reported from the area were crimes of trespassing and public violence. The challenges that SAPS is facing are the reluctance of potential witnesses to give statements and the identification of legal owners of the land.

[See presentation document for more details]

Discussion

Ms C Phillips (DA) referred to slide three of the Department’s presentation. She asked why the previous lease agreements were allowed to lapse before the category B and C forestry partners could be found, and before agreements could be entered into. There were court orders, and security was provided. How were the invasions allowed to continue? She noted that the DPWI legal team is awaiting internal approval for the eviction process. Who is going to give this approval? How much longer is it going to take?

She heard Minister Patricia de Lille was not very interested in the matter. But as a sworn Member of the legislature, she needs to uphold the law and show interest when it comes to the enforcement of laws.

She commented that handing the land back to a department that does not seem interested in the matter is concerning, because the land will be handed over but the law will not be enforced. There are six cases registered, but there are more than 4 000 invaders; those numbers do not add up.

Why has SAPS not taken up the offer of profiling the cellphone data and financial analysis? The interventions mentioned by SAPS seem wasteful because they have not prevented the 4 000 people from invading the land, and they have not removed the 4 000 people. What has the 15 operations that they had achieved? It is concerning that it takes SAPS three years what most journalists can do in less than a day.

Mr D Bryant (DA) recognised the difficult position that the DFFE is in, and acknowledged the work that has been done from their side to try and address the complicated issue. He noted that the Department is trying to protect the assets that are under its control – in the interest of health, safety, and agriculture that is around those properties, and also the potential economic activity of the area, which includes the jobs that are going to be lost by the local people. To hear that the land will be given to DPWI is sad because of all the jobs that will be lost. This is sad because people need jobs to buy food and provide for their families. How many jobs are put at risk because of the land being handed over? What impact does it have on the implantation of the forestry masterplan, going forward?

Why was the support offered for further forensic investigation and assistance not responded to? There is a lot of information available online. From a Google search, there was an article on 30 October 2021, from News24, where individuals admitted that they had been involved in encouraging people to illegally occupy that land. Cellphone clips are available online, of people encouraging others to occupy that land. An online presentation from SAPS titled “Illegal land evictions invasions conflict resolutions and labour rights” stated that “if information exists under oath that a person or persons are conspiring to invade land, such person may be arrested in terms of Section 2a of the Writers Assembly Act 1956”. Why have SAPS not acted in terms of this available information? Why did SAPS not act on the assistance from the DFFE? The jobs that could have been available to the nearby communities are at risk. There was a fire in the area as well, and it created a lot of damage. SAPS must hold the people accountable for encouraging land invasions to take place.

Ms A Weber (DA) commented that it is sad that issues like this still happen in a country that has laws in place. How much money has this whole process cost? Was money for the protection and security of the land sent?

She noted that, in one of the presentations, the cutting down of trees was mentioned. Was this part of forestry already there, or was it not started with?

Mr N Paulsen (EFF) commented that the people of Knoflokskraal are revolutionary, implementing the EFF’s number one pillar – land expropriation without compensation. In the Western Cape, people are forced to be backyard dwellers. The national and provincial government fails them. Homeless and landless people in the Western Cape and South Africa should find land anywhere and occupy it. SAPS must keep law and order, and prevent evictions and those denying people their birthright of a place to stay.

He noted that the Department presented the community with an opportunity to participate in community forestry, but the community refused. Knoflokskraal is very far from many essential services people may use, and from economic activity. What are the community’s reasons for turning down the offer of community forestry? What other support would be given to the community? Are there any further engagements with the community of Knoflokskraal, as the department of skills should be involved to assist the community in need to capacitate them with skills to build livelihoods for themselves? What is the estimated value of the potential forestry activity in Knoflokskraal? It would be great if 4 000 people could participate in meaningful economic activities. It is a perfect case study of how a new South Africa can allow people to reclaim their dignity. The EFF will be involved in making this change, but people should not be denied access to the land.

Mr P Modise (ANC) commented on the presentation by SAPS. He said that it does not make sense how there are over 4 000 people and only five cases are registered, of which one is already withdrawn and four are waiting to be known whether the case is concrete or not. Will the processes at Grabouw positively or negatively impact the implementation of the Forestry Masterplan and the expected job creation out of community forestry?

Minister Creecy mentioned that some land occupants claim they are the first nation. They were questioning why they have put in a land restitution claim when the law allows for restitution claims dating back to 1913-1998. It does not consider that the land claims were reopened in 2014. Was the community appreciative or receptive to the rule of law? What is the impact of this land invasion on the environment and the forestry ecosystem? What will it take to rehabilitate this land? What are the concerns of the other forestry and agricultural holdings? Has the conversation been extended to that level? What are the agricultural conservation holdings in the artisan areas? Has the Department considered doing a feasibility study on the land? What will the economic impact be if the land is returned to DPWI? What is expected from the Portfolio Committee to the Department on what needs to be done?

SAPS’ presentation is not saying much. Has the entity received any concrete information on the claims that the land is owned by different owners, or is that a task for the National Prosecuting Authority?

Ms N Gantsho (ANC) asked that since the provincial government is not assisting in checking for alternative land for the people of Knoflokskraal, if it is possible to involve the Department of Agriculture, Rural Development, and Land Reform to check if there is no other land available. A joint portfolio committee has to happen between the DPWI and DFFE. The Minister of DPWI should also be present and give her an understanding of these issues.

The Chairperson acknowledged the good work the Department has been doing to resolve the problems. Joining the community with community forestry agreements would be very good for job creation, especially with the high levels of poverty, inequality, and unemployment. The plans by the Department would accommodate all 4 000 people, which is very good. What would be the role of the employees if the land is returned to the DPWI?

The District Development Model was meant to bring all the spheres of government together to resolve issues of service delivery to the people. When these issues are heard, the local and provincial governments are not joining the plans. It is not known why they do not want to cooperate. If members of the state are not working together, people will invade the land.

She noted that the presentation of SAPS indicated a court order from the DPWI, which shows that no one is allowed to construct structures at Knoflokskraal, except for people who were already there in November 2020 and January 2021. Can this be clarified – why this exception if informal structures were part of the land invasion? What is the precise date of the land invasion in Grabouw? The community currently living in the plantation forest land evaluates the claim in the area where they are living. How many people are living on the land now?

Responses

Minister Creecy agreed with Ms Gantsho that it would be helpful for the Committee to receive a briefing from DPWI, as she does not want to answer on their behalf. Minister De Lille believed at that time that the land invasion had gone too far to be reversed, but DFFE thought it could still be reversed. History proved Minister De Lille to be correct.

It is difficult to answer the question of how many jobs could have been created. The Department was keen to keep this land under forestry because there is a global interest in forestry fibre. Paper made from trees being cut down is no longer the primary purpose for forestry products. Forestry fibre is mainly used in the manufacturing of garments, and there is international interest in this product. In interactions with the forestry sector, there were conversations that this land should be returned to productive use because there is a market opportunity and market interest for forestry fibre. There are high levels of unemployment in society. The Department would want to do that where land can be used for productive economic purposes rather than residential purposes.

When engaged with forestry, it is important to recognise that 200 families cannot settle on the land where trees want to be grown. Forestry is an extensive activity that requires a lot of land and cannot be shared with 200 families. The people have cut down all trees, burnt the area, and divided the land into little plots. Trees cannot be planted in those circumstances. It will either be the workers of the plantations or, in the case of this model, owner growers. But 200 families cannot live on the same plantation. The Minister does not want to decide whether the land should be used for residential purposes, agricultural purposes, or forestry purposes. It is no longer possible to use the land for forestry, and the Minister is no longer the owner of the land. The land has to be returned to the owners, who would have to decide the land use. The Minister cannot decide on the land use, only using the land for forestry purposes. If it decided on the land being used for residential purposes, which is what the occupiers of the land wish for, that means that the land is in the hands of the land owners.

When the original discussion was had, the Minister told Minister De Lille that the land is very far from services and municipalities are already under financial strain. Taking services up to a mountain would be more expensive than providing services in a settlement. DPWI can provide alternative land, as they own the land. The Minister cannot be involved when agricultural land is changed to residential land because it requires land use change. As land was to be protected for forestry, the Department of Agriculture was trying to protect land for agricultural purposes. Where land is set out to be used for economic purposes, it should be used for economic purposes.

In response to the Chairperson’s question on the District Development Model, this piece of land falls into the Overberg District Municipality. Minister De Lille is the district champion. This would be an interesting question to ask Minister De Lille, if the talks of a combined meeting are followed through.

Ms Nodada responded to the question of the lease lapse. She explained that it was a lease that was entered into for a 20-year period, where land was taken out of Forestry because of environmental and water-related issues; it was due to end in 2019. Part of the reason it ended in 2019 was that most of the areas were burnt down in the 2017 and 2018 fires in the Southern Cape. The lease itself was due to end the time between the ending of the lease, and the Department’s take-over was impacted by the lockdown measures, which stopped all work done in that area at the time.

Quick calculations will not be given on the number of jobs that could have been created. But the masterplan indicates that, if 151 000 hectares (not linked to production) are brought back into production in South Africa, then 100 000 jobs will be created both in the private and processing side of the value chain.

The impact of the invasions will affect the masterplan. The package that was identified to be economically viable was presented as a package. On its own, it will not be as attractive to the private sector. The desired investment that the industry would have wanted to make would be affected. The correct and total costs that have been spent are not available on all the processes so far. A calculation between the Department and DPWI will have to be made first.

When looking at the plans of the Department, they will not be responsible for direct management of plantation, but they will be responsible for issues related to enforcement of legislation responsible for issues related to post-settlement reports and cleaning related. The staff will be responsible for that land, as the plan was for it to be leased out. The person who leases the land has to be responsible for the undertaking they have signed and make sure that the plantations are functional. The colleague in the Western Cape still has a lot of work to do to ensure that the branch functions in terms of the new structure that has been approved.

Lt. Gen. Patekile responded to the question about when the invasions started. She said that there were two cases for 2020. One of the cases was a court hearing, and the other for a house break-in case. In response to why SAPS did not take up the offer from the Department, Mr Patekile said that they did not refuse the offer but the case is in court for decisions to be made. These cases are investigations guided by procedure. To avoid conflict, people should provide proof that they own the land.

The first case speaks about 100 to 200 people allocated to the land, which is one reported incident. SAPS are not the land owners; they only receive the reports and open the case thereafter. It can become a complicated process. A total of 15 operations have been assisted for sharing, and SAPS is not responsible for evictions; they can only assist. During the lockdown, they were prevented from doing other work, but securities were put in place to guard the land. After the land was guarded, no other reports were received on more people occupying the land illegally. The amount of money spent on the 15 operations cannot be given, but it can be provided to the Committee, in writing.

Follow-up questions

Mr Bryant asked if any arrests or charges were laid against individuals for instigating the illegal occupation and invasions.

Ms Phillips pointed out that her question about the lease being reallocated was not answered. It is understood that the lease was going to expire. However, in so many instances, in the departments, the Department first waits for the lease or the contract to expire before action is taken. This is unacceptable. There should be smooth transactions from one leaseholder to another. The police have to investigate who the owner of the land is, rather than waiting on someone to claim it.

Mr Paulsen said that the people who are born in South Africa are the owners of the land. This project will go throughout Cape Town, Western Cape, and South Africa, where the rightful owners of the land will be taking over the land. The general present must ensure that no one is evicted from the land that belongs to them. What is the SAPS doing to ensure that there is a satellite police station to ensure that those 4 000 people are given protection and the presence of law? There is an opportunity for a hybrid system. An area can be built for accommodation for those 200 families, and the rest can be used for economic activity. This possibility must not be given up on. What is being done to ensure services are given to these people at Knoflokskraal? Who is responsible for it? The poorest service delivery for houses is in Cape Town. So, these people ensured they no longer relied on the Western Cape's ineffective government. What opportunities exist for a hybrid process, where a small area is allocated for residences and the remaining land is used for economic activity such as forestry or agriculture? What plans are in place for a satellite police station to keep those people safe and ensure that there is law and order in Knoflokskraal?

Responses

Minister Creecy responded by saying that it is important to look at the history of the whole forestry branch. It must be understood that this branch was transferred to the Department in April 2020. This branch was originally in another department. Part of the reason why it was referred to the Department is that the forestry sector needed attention. Through this transfer, the Department started its work on the forestry masterplan, and a process for the category B and C forests. The categories were underused for some time, from the existing leases that have expired. It is important to consider the transition as well. The Department agreed that the governance arrangements should be sorted out as soon as possible, as delay can lead to difficulties.

In response to Mr Paulsen, the Minister said that they are both from a background that the history of the world to date is the history of the class struggle. To understand whether there is an investment in forestry, the nature of the invaders must be examined. Interestingly, these invaders are driving SUVs and can bring facilities onto the land they are occupying. Minister Creecy expressed that she understood the issue of landlessness and poverty, and had a lot of experience with the lack of moveable and immovable assets that landless communities normally confront. It is not the experience in this case. Perhaps there is no investment to engage in forestry because the primary source of revenue is already secured. The background must always be researched before thinking about solutions. That is why Minister Creecy met with the communities to understand their backgrounds. But the primary interest of the community was not economic activity. The class structure of that situation can be discussed.

The Department wanted to continue with forestry, but it was not possible. It will have to apply its forestry masterplan somewhere else, where there are poor and landless communities. This would include the Department's workers if investment grows.

Lt.   Gen. Patekile said that the main charges that are open are against trespassers. Additional charges will follow once the main instigators are found. There is no ownership of the land, which is why it is difficult to make a decision. The person who owns the land must issue a statement because the court order that has been mentioned is dealing with a criminal element. The Department is unsure how satellite policing can be done in that space, but a second vehicle has been allocated to Knofloskraal daily.

The Chairperson agreed that a joint meeting with DPWI should be held soon, and then the Department can also update the Portfolio Committee on the progress of handing the land back to DPWI.

The Chairperson thanked everyone for attending the meeting.

The meeting is adjourned.

Audio

No related

Download as PDF

You can download this page as a PDF using your browser's print functionality. Click on the "Print" button below and select the "PDF" option under destinations/printers.

See detailed instructions for your browser here.

Share this page: