Malawi: Communities Under Siege

With many people in low income countries denied the right to be heard, access to justice and equality under the law - fundamental and constitutional rights - it is not surprising to see individuals from affected communities taking matters into their own hands. In my country, Malawi, weak, unaccountable, and unresponsive legal institutions have led to groups of people standing up to protect what belongs to them. The central lakeshore district of Salima is a shining example as covered by the local media[1]; a group of villagers in Senga-Bay, Salima armed themselves with Panga knives (machetes), bows and arrows against an eviction notice that would see over 18,000 people displaced to pave the way for investors to build a five star hotel in the area.

Initially it was understood that the investor, who was only identified as Sultan, purchased the land through the traditional leader, a Group village Headman of the area, in the year 2000 for a disclosed amount of 200, 000 Malawian Kwacha (approximately USD 610). However, when the matter was taken to court, Sultan gave a different version of the story.  He said that he had not bought the land but rather had given 200,000 Malawi Kwacha to the Group Village Headman as a token of appreciation for the land allocated to him by the traditional leader. Although there are, obvious inconsistencies with the story, and questions regarding procedures followed, the villagers lost out to Sultan who won the case in court. Even then, the people of Senga-Bay, Salima, vowed to die for their land and water resources, at any cost.

According to the Weekend Nation Newspaper (Pemba, October 27 2012), the villagers were evicted with no resettlement plan or any kind of compensation, raising concerns about the future of the community. For many of the villagers, this land has been their only home, and fishing in Lake Malawi's waters their only reliable source of income. Akisa Kanyaso, an angler who is raising six orphans in addition to her eight children, has been working from this area since 1984: "I have built a four-bedroom self-contained house and I am paying schools fees for all my children and orphans from this business". The cost and burden of relocation, which includes the relocation of ancestral graves, would fall on the local villagers themselves. With no compensation, villagers are less willing to accept the deal their Group village Headman struck with Sultan.  Large investment deals such as this threaten the continuation of cultural heritage and customs, and undermine traditional legal systems (local inheritance laws, for example) of a people.

Currently, under the Customary land systems of Malawi, local chiefs are considered custodians of land on behalf of the people and can be consulted in matters of land purchases however, some abuse their position, or are unaware of the value of their resources.

There is a need to support grassroots resistance movements, along with demanding that the processes of acquiring land both by national and foreign investors reflect good governance, particularly participation, accountability, and transparency. Public officers, including chiefs and other local traditional authorities, must be made accountable to the people of Malawi and not only to the few individuals who occupy senior positions within government.

Malawi is not an isolated case. An estimated 227 million hectares in low-income countries have been sold, leased or licensed to international investors[2]. In Africa, Liberia, Ethiopia, Mozambique are among those countries selling their land. Proponents of land investment argue that these land deals create win-win situations in host countries, but there has been no supporting evidence for such claims. In February 2012, the BBC [3] indicated that most projects had failed due to insufficient fertile land and financing difficulties or business plans that are too ambitious. As a result, the few jobs created were short lived and some projects abandoned - as has been the case in Tanzania and Mozambique. In addition, the few jobs created are poorly compensated, and potential public revenues from foreign investment tend to be limited by tax exemptions.

The global rush to purchase large tracts of land in Africa has adverse consequences for the poorest communities, with their rights to food and basic services ignored.  The most affected are women, key participants in agricultural food production, whose situation is worsened by their marginalisation in decision-making processes. As with the mining sector, negotiations are usually shrouded in secrecy and endorsed behind closed doors, with little to no public consultation. Unfortunately, governments and traditional leaders are often complicit, as the communities in Senga-Bay realised.