Question NW2474 to the Minister of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development
26 June 2023 - NW2474
Winkler, Ms HS to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development
(1) Whether, with reference to her reply to question 1384 on 4 May 2023, she will clarify the discrepancy in the reference numbers with regard to Farm Meyershoek No. 847; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details; (2) at what stage is claim KRN6/2/2/E/42/0/0/25 that was implemented to accommodate community members who were not part of the original claim KRN6/2/2/E/42/0/0/202; (3) (a) what is the timeline for the conclusion of the claim, (b) what are the reasons that there has been a delay to finalise the specified claim, (c) what are the reasons that her department is allegedly restarting the process of the claim when in fact it should be in its final stage and (d) how will her department assist the residents of the community who have waited for years for the claim to be processed and were told it was in the final stages, only to find that now the process is allegedly starting from scratch
Reply:
1. Yes, Reference KRN6/2/2/E/42/0/0/25 was lodged by Mr. Mswelengi Bhekumuzi Bhengu on behalf of the Meyershoek Community on 23 December 1998, for the Remainder of Portion 0 of the farm Meyers Hoek No.847 in extent of 1513, 5256 hectares. The lodger and a few members alleged that they were not part of the settlement as they did not want alternative land.
Reference KRN6/2/2/E/42/0/0/202 was settled on 9 January 2000 in full and final settlement of a court order in respect of the following properties:
- farm Meyershoek No. 847;
- farm Onrust No. 848;
- Rem of Nels Rust; and
- Portion 8 of Nooitgedacht No. 903 collective extent of 3262.9193 ha.
2. The additional members that were not part of the original claim (KRN6/2/2/E/42/0/0/202) were added on the name verification list in the Section 42D memorandum for KRN6/2/2/E/42/0/0/25, after the homestead identification was analyzed against the original list.
3. (a) The outcome will be based on the further research recommendations.
(b) The delay was due to obtaining a legal opinion on the court order.
(c) Further research is needed as there is a position taken through the Court Order to see if the matter can be taken further.
(d) The Legal Unit of the Department will present the final further research report and the legal opinion on the matter based on the Court Order.