CONTENTSContents

Letter of transmission:from the Chief Land Claims Commissioner to theMinister of Agriculture and Land Affairs

Foreword:by the Minister of Agriculture and Land Affairs

Overview:Chief Land Claims Commissioner

National Report:Major Settled Claims

National Report:Special Projects

Profile:Members of the Commission

Regional Land ClaimsCommissioner's Reports

Financial Report

Provision of Access to Information

Claims Settled:Land Claims Court

2

3

5

10

21

24

26

48

50

51

TRANSMISSION

2

The Honourable Minister Ms Thoko DidizaMinister of Agriculture and Land Affairs

Acting-Chief Land Claims Commissioner (SA)Mr Thozamile Thomas Gwanya

120 Plein SteetCape Town8001

Dear Honourable Minister

I am very pleased to submit to you the Annual Report for the Commission on Restitution of LandRights for the financial year ending 31 March 2003 for presentation to Parliament.

This report is prepared in accordance with the Restitution of Land Rights Act, 22 of 1994 as amended.

Yours sincerely

Letter of Transmission -From the Acting-Chief Lands Claims Commissioner

to the Minister of Agriculture and Land Affairs

3

FOREWORDFOREWORDby the Minister for Agriculture and Land Affairs, Ms Thoko Didiza

It is now eight years since the Commissionon Restitution of Land Rights wasestablished. Indeed, the “tide has turned” in

the implementation of the restitutionprogramme in South Africa. We are very proudthat more than 36 488 land claims have beensettled to date, from which 22 760 householdshave benefited, of which more than 25% areheaded by women. In the words of ChiefMokhoba of Kokstad, “The fact that we havenow got 10 000 hectares of our land backdemonstrates the seriousness of thisGovernment about reversing the humiliatingeffects of forced removals”. One of the aims ofrestitution is to restore dignity to those wholost so much, due to racial dispossession.

One of our achievements this year was thefinalisation of the Claims Validation Project,which led us to conclude that, , 96% ofthe claims on our database are valid in terms ofRestitution Act 22 of 1994, as amended. Weencountered some challenges in the validationof the remaining 4%. This was largely due toclaimants who could not be tracked down, as

well as inadequate information for thevalidation of claims. We appreciate the support(R 13,2 million) we received from the Belgiangovernment that made this project possible.We are now bracing ourselves for the follow-upClaimant Verification project that will enableus to determine the rightful claimants,construct family trees and obtain copies of IDdocuments and affidavits, among others. Thisproject will enable us to accelerate thesettlement of outstanding claims.

During the past year, the settlement of ruralclaims was accelerated. It must be noted thatrural claims involve large expanses of land, aswell as a large number of claimant communities.The finalisation of rural claims will contributedirectly to the alleviation of poverty, as thebeneficiaries now have access to land, which is ameans of making a livelihood. In their land useplans, claimants have indicated that the landwill be used for agricultural production,infrastructure, forestry, conservation, rurallivelihood and housing, among others.

This has underlined the importance of workingclosely with the provincial government andobtaining a commitment from them where, forexample, the provincial Department ofAgriculture has to provide technical assistanceto the new farm owners. In this regard, theLimpopo government has led by example, as ithas not only lent technical support, but has alsoapproved bursaries for a number of studentsfrom claimant communities to undertakestudies focused on the projects chosen by theclaimants. The provincial Department ofHousing in KwaZulu Natal has committeditself to providing support to the rural housingproject for Makhoba, near Kokstad.

The local and district municipalities have animportant role to play in the implementation ofthe awards of the restitution programme. Weneed to improve on the alignment of restitutionwith the municipal Integrated DevelopmentProgrammes (IDPs), thereby ensuring qualityand sustainable settlements. Every effort has

prima facie

4

also been made to align restitution with theIntegrated Sustainable Rural DevelopmentProgramme, as well as the Urban RenewalProgramme.

We appreciate the support that the NationalDevelopment Agency and the Land Bank areproviding to new landowners. Claimants usingthe support are able to develop detailedstrategies and business plans for the productiveand sustainable use of land. We challenge theprivate sector, as well as Non-governmentalOrganisations (NGOs), to participate,particularly in building the capacity of theclaimant communities who are now the newlandowners.

The Land Act of 19 June 1913 was the mosteffective tool used by the colonial governmentsto dispossess our people of their land. This June,it will be 90 years since that legislation was

promulgated. When this Government cameinto power in 1994, the first thing we did was toensure the reversal of the effects of the Land Actof 1913. Hence, this Commission wasestablished. In an attempt to mark ourcommitment to giving land back to the people,“putting the land rights in the right hands”, Ihave declared June 2003 “Land Month”.

I want to take this opportunity to thank all thepeople who have played a part in theimplementation of the restitution programme. Iam happy to present this report to Parliament,to all South Africans and to those who areinterested in land reform in this country.

This is an attempt by the Government to ensurejustice, equity, fairness and reconciliation. It isour contribution to a better life for all SouthAfricans.

Ms Thoko DidizaMinister for Agriculture and Land Affairs

DEDICATION TO YOUTH AND WOMEN

We dedicate this report to youth and women for the critical role they are playing not only in landreform but also in the reconstruction and development of this new South Africa.

• More than 25% of our restitution beneficiaries are women

• Most of the Commission staff is young people who have the necessary energy and speed to fasttrack the settlement of land claims

• Youth and Women have a critical role to play in the post land transfer development projects andwe depend on them for their success.

5

OVERVIEW :Overview :Acting Chief Land Claims Commissioner : Tozi Gwanya

“Set standards high, you deserve the best. Try for whatyou want and never settle for less. Believe in yourselfno matter what you choose. Keep a winning attitude,you can never lose. Think about your destination butdon't worry if you stray. The most important thing is

you've learned about the way. Take all that you'vebecome to be all that you can be. Soar above the clouds

and let your dreams set you free”-Julian Hunt-

INTRODUCTION

The standard set for the Land ClaimsCommission by the President has been quitehigh: that all outstanding claims be settled bythe year 2005. The Commission is determinedto realise this goal. The Commission hascontinued to use the administrative process tosettle land claims. This is in line with theprovisions of the Restitution Act no 22 of 1994as amended (section 42D) enabling theMinister to consider the agreement of theparties to a claim take and make an award. Thishas enabled the Commission to increase the

number of claims settled to date to 36 489.The Land Claims Court as well as the AppealCourt has made very important awards thisyear. These include the Court cases contained inthis report.

Over the past year the Commission has focusedon the research and processing of rural claims.These claims constitute only some 20% of allclaims on the database. However, these claimsaffect the largest numbers of the rural poor andthey involve the largest tracts of land. A ruralc l a i m s u c h a s M b i l a c o m m u n i t y a tUmkhanyakude in KwaZulu Natal counts asone claim on the database but involves morethan 1000 households and 43 000 hectares ofland. Cato Manor is an urban claim in Durbanthat involved 5613 individual claimants, whichcounted as such on the Commission's database,although it transferred less than 50 hectares tothe claimants. As in most urban claims the bulkof the Cato Manor restitution award was forfinancial compensation.

The Commission has encountered a number ofchallenges in its attempt to fast-track thesettlement of rural claims and these include thefollowing:

• Most of the rural claimants are illiterate andthus take time to produce the requireddocuments. Construction of family trees,recording of minutes and importantresolutions becomes a serious problem.

• Most of the land in the ex- homeland areas isunregistered and un-surveyed, and thusthere are no titles/ maps. This makes deeds aswell as archival research more difficult.

• Most rural claimants have problemsproducing the required copies of personaldocuments such as identity documents,death certificates, marriage certificates,affidavits etc.

• Family and community disputes take muchlonger to resolve

6

• Infrastructure and communicationproblems make it difficult to accessclaimants and to hold meetings. Distancesto be travelled and the condition of ruralroads pose a challenge.

• Determination of the monetary value of theclaim and the development projects to belinked to the restitution award

• T h e p a t r i a r c h a l n a t u r e o f r u r a lcommunities.

Some of the challenges that do not necessarilyrelate to the processing of the claim but areimportant in addressing post settlement issuesinclude the patriarchal nature of ruralsocieties. Some 25% of the beneficiaries arewomen.

The Commission acknowledges the fact thatrural claims are the vehicle through which ithas to contribute to poverty alleviation and tot h e I n t e g r a t e d R u r a l D e v e l o p m e n tProgramme. It is interesting to note that upuntil the 1960s, when able-bodied rural menhad to go for employment in the mines andmanufacturing industries in order to be able topay compulsory taxes, the rural economy wasself-sufficient. Rural communities usedappropriate technologies and produced theirown food, without any dependence on migrantremittances, social grants or groceries from thesupermarkets. Winds of change have blown inthe rural areas and the most affected are therural women and youth. Systematicdispossession, reduced land holding, insecuretenure, industrialization and urbanisationhave all contributed to the lack of interest inagricultural production in rural areas. This isone of the challenges the nation has to dealwith as it works to reverse the effects ofapartheid and rebuilds itself.

The Commission received 68 787 claims lodgedby claimants since it started its work in 1995.The Commission experienced a number ofteething problems in its first attempts to dealwill the bulk of claims lodged. There were noclear policies or procedures then. The judicialapproach was followed and this meant that all

claims had to be referred to the Land ClaimsCourt. By its very nature the judicial process wasvery slow hence the settlement of only 41 claimsbetween 1995 and 1999. The other challenge wasthe inadequate staffing of the Commission.Initially it was envisaged that the Commissionwould need only a few staff members and theDepartment of Land Affairs would second staffto provide administrative support. The businessprocess mapping that was conducted in 1998revealed that there were inherent weaknesses inthe legal and institutional design of therestitution process and this led to the slow paceof the settlement of claims. The section 42Damendment to the Restitution Act was passedby Parliament in March 1999 and this led to theincreased number of claims settled between1999 and 2003. The Commission, in terms of itsown rules, then adopted the prioritization ofclaims to be settled each year. Given the fact thatthe Commission had only 342 employeesnationally, the Commission could process onlyso many claims per year, and consequently alarge number of claims on the system remainedunattended.

The settlement of a total of 30 012 claims by 31March 2002 led to even more inquiries fromclaimants regarding the status of their landclaims. Current land owners wanted to knowthe validity of the claims on their farms. TheCommission then decided to embark on theClaims Validation Project (CVP) over the pastyear. The Commission found that there were 37938 claims filed that were not in the priority list,whose validity was not known. The Commissionagreed on a preliminary investigation to bec o n d u c t e d , w h i c h w o u l d c o v e r t h ecircumstances of dispossession, propertydescription, deeds research, and meeting of theacceptance criteria of each claim. In other words,the preliminary research would give theCommission the validity of the claim.

The CVP was started in October 2001 and theMinister accepted the status report in January2003. This reflected a 95% completion and by theend of March 2003 about 36 940 claims had beenvalidated. The remaining 998 claims would bevalidated the following financial year. These arethe claims where claimants were untraceabledespite several visits, radio announcements,word of mouth, etc. The Commission had toengage service providers in order to complete

prima face

CLAIMS VALIDATION PROJECT

7

this task within this short period.

This project has helped the Commission tokeep in touch with each of the claimants andthus keep them abreast of developmentsregarding the status of their claim. Claimantsare now in a position to engage with the nextstage of the processing of their claims. The nextstages will deal with claimant verification (therightful claimant in terms of the Act) valuation(determining the monetary value of the claim),options assessment (restoration, alternativeland, financial compensation, other),development planning, project managementand capacity building for legal entities such asCPAs or Trusts. The Commission has decidedto package these stages as its next project andthe Belgian government have agreed to supportthis project with an amount of six millionEuros.

The Commission has realized that working insilos does not add value to the efforts ofgovernment in service delivery and in reversingthe effects of apartheid. It has become veryimportant that the Commission works closelywith national department such as WaterAffairs, Agriculture, Housing, Minerals andEnergy, Environmental Affairs, Public Works,Public Enterprise and Local Government. Ourrelationship with these departments isimportant at the stage of negotiatingsettlement of the claims but also after the claimhas been settled. The Commission needs to getthe support and commitment of provincialgovernment departments, especially Housing,Agriculture, Environment, Tourism and LocalGovernment. Local and District Municipalitieshave an even more important role to play,especially on issues of housing anddevelopment planning. The Commission hasbeen encouraged by a few non-governmentalOrganisations (NGOs) who have played anessentia l role in assist ing claimantcommunities in the processing of claims as wellas in development planning. One good exampleis the Border Rural Committee (an affiliate ofNational Land Committee) in the EasternCape. The Commission cannot afford to pay lipservice to the crucial principles of co-operativegovernance which are enshrined in ourconstitution. Each of these stakeholders has to

bring something to the party.

The Commission has been asked, “What doclaimants do with the land after you havetransferred it to them”? The Restitution Actmandates us simply to redress the loss of rightsin land and restoration of land. The Commissionis also required to implement the awards of theLand Claims Court and those of the Minister ofLand Affairs. The Act is silent aboutdevelopment planning and support to theclaimants after land transfer. However, thequestion of the sustainabil ity of theCommission's settlements continues to beraised to us. The Commission's response hasbeen to invite relevant stakeholders to be part ofour deeds of settlement, even before we finalizethe claim. These negotiations have helped theCommission to map issues that relate to postland transfer. These include issues such asfeasibility studies, land use plans, detailedbusiness plans, management of projects,continuity and succession planning, technicalsupport, on-farm-advise, extension services,social facilitation, after-care, financing ,marketing, etc. All these are very important tothe new land owners who have been alienatedfrom their land for a long time and who have beensystematically deprived of advancementopportunities by the previously raciallydiscriminatory regime.

The Commission has established PostSettlement Support units in each Regional LandClaims Commission office. Their main focus isdevelopment facilitation and coordination, i.e.to identify development planning issues, inviterelevant stakeholders during the negotiationphase of the claim, agree on the roles, getcommitment and action from each of thestakeholders, capacity building for the new landowners, strengthening of the claimants legalentities and provide facilitation support asneeded. It must be emphasized that it is not therole of the Commission to implementdevelopment projects. Ours is a coordinationfunction, ensuring that the new land owners areassisted to get in touch with appropriatesupport structures to ensure the sustainabilityof their projects.

The Commission is inviting more developmentactors who believe they have a role to play in theempowerment of the land reform beneficiaries.

POST SETTLEMENT SUPPORT

8

FORESTRY, CONSERVATION ANDMINERAL RIGHTS CLAIMS.

CAPACITY BUILDING FOR CLAIMANTS

CHALLENGES FOR THE COMMISSION

The Commission has a number of claims forforestry land, protected areas and land withmining rights. The private sector operating onland with such claims has not been verysupportive of the restitution process. Theiroriginal attitude was to oppose all the claims,with an emphasis on following the judicialprocess in dealing with these claims. Thatprocess has proved to be very time consumingand often affected important businessdecisions. Some entrepreneurs have realizedthat there is not much that they can do to avoiddealing with valid claims. Most of them haveexpressed their preference to have claimantsopt for financial compensation, in which casethe claimants would be “bought off their land”.This option has not been acceptable toclaimants and is not in the best interest of therestitution process. The attitude of a number ofstakeholders involved in such claims has sincechanged. They are now prepared to accept thatthe successful claimants own the land onwhich they are doing business and that theypay an agreed equitable rental for the use of theland.

On forestry and conservation claims theCommission has had discussions with theDepartment of Water Affairs and Forestry(DWAF) , Environmental Affairs and Tourism(DEAT), Public Works (DPW) and LandAffairs (DLA) and the Commission agreed onthe manner in which to deal with these claims,including among others:

• The land shall be owned in title by thesuccessful claimants

The claimants shall consider their optionsand agree to maintain the current land use(be it forestry or conservation)

The title shall have a notarial deed, whichrestricts land use as agreed with theclaimants and the Government.

The claimants (new land owners) shallbecome lessors and they shall enter into alease agreement with the lessees and thusan agreed market related rental shall bepayable to the claimants

A number of claims on conservation land havebeen settled on this basis, such as Mbila, Mabasoin KwaZulu Natal and Dwesa Cwebe in theEastern Cape.

There are a number of claims which fall on landwith mining rights, such as Majeng in the FreeState, Richtersveld in the Northern Cape,Bokona Petla in Mpumalanga etc. TheCommission is pursuing discussions with theDepartments of Minerals and Energy as well asPublic Enterprises and hope to reach anagreement with them on the manner in whichthese claims can be resolved.

The Claimants need assistance during theprocessing of their claims to understand therestitution process, the rights in land, clearp r o p e r t y d e s c r i p t i o n s , v a l u a t i o n s ,determination of the monetary value of theclaim, construction of family trees, affidavits,options assessment, negotiation, mediation andconflict resolution, prioritization of needs,development planning, project management,business development etc. In dealing with theseissues, the Commission needs the support fromall those who support restitution in this country,in order to ensure a smooth land reform process.

In the words of Nelson Mandela “

”

It is quite a challenge that the Commission has to

•

•

•

• The claimants shall establish legal entities forl a n d o w n e r s h i p a n d f o r b u s i n e s sundertakings on the land.

• Investors shall be encouraged to allow theclaimants to have equitable shares in thebusiness ventures on such land.

• The ventures shall have benefits which flowto neighbouring communities.

Education andtraining are the great engine to personal development. It isthrough education and training that the daughter of apeasant can become a doctor, that the son on amineworker can become the head of the mine, that thechild of a farm worker can become the President of a greatnation. It is what we make of what we have, not what weare given, that separates one person from another

9

settle all the outstanding claims within thenext two years, in line with the Presidentialdirective. The fact that the restitution budgethas been increased from R375 million in 2002/3to R800 million in 2003/4 is a sign of thepolitical will and commitment to support therestitution process. The increase is howeverinadequate given that we need about R1.2billion for claims that are prioritized forsettlement during the coming financial year.

The Commission does not only need additionalfunding but also the personnel to interact withthe claimants and other stakeholders. TheCommission currently has 342 employees andthus approximately 40 people in each of theregional land claims commission offices. TheCommission actually needs 20 more people ineach office in order to deal with the urgency ofgetting the job done within the time frames set.

The processing of rural claims remains achallenge, particularly because it takes so longtime to process such claims. The project cyclefor processing rural claims has been reviewedand the aim is to shorten the cycle from threeyears to one year and the Commission hopes toachieve this over the next two years.

The Commission would like to see thecommitment of municipalities to supportrestitution translated into action and that theclaimants would experience that support.

The price of land, particularly in theMpumalanga and Limpopo provinces isunreasonably high and this may render therestitution programme very expensive if notimpossible. The Commission needs thecommitment and support of current landowners as well as political intervention if it isto make headway with resolving this problem.

Good progress has been made in restitution,claimants have received back their land,equitable redress has been experienced bymany and yet the restitution wheels are stillrolling.

This could not be achieved without thestrategic leadership of the Minister, Ms ThokoDidiza, the direction and support from the

Portfolio Committee on Agriculture and LandAffairs and the advice from the National Councilof Provinces.

The President together with the Minister ofFinance have demonstrated their interest andcommitment to restitution and they haveconfirmed this through the State of the Nationaddress and the Budget speech respectively.

The Commission appreciates the support it getsfrom the provincial governments, especiallythrough the MECs for Agriculture and Housingand from all municipalities.

The Director General of the Department of LandAffairs, Dr Gilingwe Mayende, and the ChiefFinancial Officer, Ms Sarah Choane, have playedan important supporting role in theimplementation of this programme, especially inbudgetary and compliance issues. They have alsoparticipated in the governance of the RestitutionTrust Fund, which acts as a conduit for donorfunding in support of restitution.

We record our appreciation for the sterlingwork done by the former Chief Land ClaimsCommissioner, Dr Wallace Amos Mgoqi, theonly remaining founder member of theCommission, who has taken the Commissionfrom low levels of performance to the verysuccessful figures recorded over the past twoyears. Adv Mgoqi was part of the Commissionfor eight years and history preserves a specialplace for persons of his caliber.

The Commissioners and their staff have doneexceedingly well, working long hours, enduringunfair and destructive criticism, assistingclaimants, always going beyond the call of duty.

A word of appreciation to all governmentdepartments, non-governmental organisations,donors, communities, farmers and individualswho have made the Commission's difficult taskendurable and possible.

Thank you for your support, may God richlybless you !

Tozi GwanyaActing Chief Land Claims Commissioner (SA)

CONCLUSION

NATIONAL REPORT

10

FREE STATE AND NORTHERN CAPE

Palmietfontein

Herschel

Andriesfontein

In 1988, by order of the State President at thetime, Mr PW Botha, the farm, Palmietfonteinno. 67, together with other farms falling withinthe districts of Bloemfontein and Dewetsdorp,were proclaimed released areas. This was inaccordance with the provisions of Section 2 (4)of the Development Trust and Land Act, 1936(Act 18 of 1936). Later, the South AfricanDevelopment Trust (SADT) purchased thewhole farm.

Current user departments are the Departmentof Environmental Affairs and Tourism and theDepartment of Water Affairs and Forestry. TheRustfontein Dam wall and the RustfonteinGame Reserve are situated on the land.

This rural claim was settled on 27 April 2002.According to this claim, 1 860 hectares wererestored to three households, consisting of ninebeneficiaries. Two opted for land restoration oralternative land and the rest opted for financialcompensation.

Under the Apartheid government, the area ofHerschel, a self-governing territory at the time,was excised from the Ciskei administration andplaced under the administration of theTranskei. This led to mass removals of peoplefrom Herschel to other outlying areas. Somefamilies went to an area known as Thornhill inthe Eastern Cape, while others went toPhuthaditjhaba in the former homeland ofQwaqwa. About 129 families, consisting of 588people, were recorded to have left Herschel forPhuthaditjhaba. Some of these families stillreside in Phuthaditjhaba, while others areresident in Botshabelo. The total extent of theland claimed is 7 998 hectares. Some 3 162hectares have been restored to some families, asothers have opted for equitable redress in theform of financial compensation.

The settlement of this rural claim marks aturning point in the settlement of rural claims.The claim was settled in July 2002, inBotshabelo, and marked an end to one of themajor removals that took place during theApartheid government's implementation of itspolicy of homeland consolidation in the late1970s.

The Ngakatau family held title deed for andoccupied Andriesfontein farm from as early as1886, until 1938, when they were forced to sellthe farm, as it was declared a “Black Spot”. Thefarm was situated outside the scheduled Blackarea of ThabaNchu. In terms of the provisions ofthe Native Trust and Land Act of 1936, citizensclassified as Blacks were disqualified fromowning and living on the farm. The sale wasimposed to advance the policies of racialdiscrimination that formed the cornerstone ofthe Apartheid regime and resulted in theremoval of the family from their ancestral land.

The Ngakatau family joined thousands of otherSouth Africans in heeding the call by ourgovernment to lodge land restitution claims.M r B o k a k o N g a k a t a u l o d g e d t h eAndriesfontein land restitution claim on behalfof the Ngakatau families on 7February 1996.

A total of 204,7225 hectares of land have beenrestored to 12 families, consisting of 50beneficiaries. This land settlement haspresented the claimant family with theopportunity to go back to their ancestral land asowners and will enable them to practisefarming and make a livelihood from theproceeds of the land.

With the assistance and co-operation of othergovernment departments, the Land ClaimsCommission is committed to the principles ofsustainable development and will provide thenecessary support, in the form of developmentsubsidies, to initiate sustainable farming on therestored land.

National Report:Major Settled Claims

11

Eastern CapeUitenhage phase 1 settled in September 2002

Khomani San

Land rights insidet h e K g a l a g a d iGemsbok NationalPark

Dakpoort

Keiskammahoek

In August 2002, the State deproclaimed thepark through Parliament and 50% of about 50000 ha of land in the Kgalagadi GemsbokNational Park was handed over to the San andMier communities.

The handing over was celebarated on 31 August2002, during the World Summit on SustainableDevelopment held in SA and history was madeas the first inhabitants of the park werehonoured and the occasion was witnessed byrepresentatives from the indigenous people ofCanada and Taiwan.

This portion of the park will be used for game-farming and hunting as a means of sustainabledevelopment of the two communities.

(second phaseof the settlement)

According to thes e t t l e m e n ta g r e e m e n t , t h eprincipal parties inthe agreement willjointly establish alodge, which will bea symbol of co-operation betweenthe parties. The aimis to promote eco-tourism and to generate income for thecommunities, in an effort to alleviate poverty inthe region.

The Department of Environmental Affairs andTourism has committed R 6,5 million to thedesign and construction of the park. Thesettlement has benefited 380 households,involving about 2000 beneficiaries.

In 1985 the government of Bophuthatswanadecided that the farm Dakpoort should beacquired as additional land to consolidateMaria Moroka National Park. The owner hadto sell or risk being expropriated, he opted for

the former. The sale of the land to governmentwas not a normal transaction of willing buyerwilling seller arrangement.

The Taiwe family lodged a claim for sub-division no. 2 of the farm Dakpoort in extent of85,6532 hectares in the Thaba Nchu District.

During December 2002 the Taiwa family,consisting of three households receivedfinancial compensation for their claim whichthey will use for small-scale farming.

The policy of betterment planning wasimplemented in the Keiskammahoek area, in

terms of provisionsof Proclamation 31 of1939 and 116 of 1949,m a d e i n t e r m so f t h e N a t i v eAdministration Actof 1927 (Section 25)and Native Trustand Land Act 18 of1 9 3 6 a n d t h u sd i s p o s s e s s e dm e m b e r s o f t h ecommunity of theiri n d i v i d u a l a n dc o l l e c t i v e l a n drights.

As a result, familieswere moved from one place to another. Sites ofcommunities were reduced by an average of 7244 ha and each household lost an average ofone hectare of arable land. Agriculturalproduction was reduced and the communitylost graves or space for graves at eachhomestead. The social structure was alsodisrupted by the internal forced removal and'first come, first serve' site allocation.Cultivation was stopped on most of the arableland and arable fields were placed somedistance away from residential sites.

With the enactment of Restitution of LandRights Act 22 of 1994, representatives of variousvillages in the Keiskammahoek area formed acommittee and lodged claims. Claimants from

EASTERN CAPE

Eastern CapeKeiskammahoek

12

each of the villages were identified and listswere compiled. Thorough verification of theclaimants was conducted and the claim wasaccepted in terms of the Act.

The settlement agreed upon by both theDepartment of Land Affairs, the Commissiona n d t h e c l a i m a n t s , w a s m a x i m u mcompensation of R 94 681 000, payable to 1704families, with 50% of the amount going to theclaimants as financial compensation and theother 50% going towards developmentalprojects to meet the prioritised needs of thecommunities. The claimant villages are Gwili-Gwili, Gxulu, Mnyameni, Mtwaku, Ndlovini,Ngobozana and Upper Ngqumeya.

Through extensive workshops conducted bythe Border Rural Committee (BRC), priorityneeds have been identified in these villages. Atsome of the villages, services such as water,electricity, access roads, fencing for crop fields,among others, are insufficient. It is hoped thatclaimants will benefit from puttinginfrastructure into place, as the villages have agood potential for agricultural development.

The Uitenhage Land and CommunityRestoration Association (ULCRA) lodged theclaim on behalf of the Kabah-Langa claimants.The Kabah and Langa area is situatednorthwest of the Central Business District ofUitenhage and comprises some 60,5 hectares.The claimants occupied the land for a period ofmore than ten years, in terms of the notorious99-year lease.

In 1966 and in 1981, respectively, the claimantsof Kabah-Langa were dispossessed of their land,in terms of Native (Urban) Areas Act 25 of 1945.The Department of Bantu Administration andDevelopment proclaimed the redefinition andcurtailment of the Kabah-Langa area, in termsof Government Notice No. 260, dated 25February 1966. The same Act was applied againin 1981, in terms of Government Notice No. 1414,dated 3 July 1981.

The application of these notices was associatedwith the forced removal of claimants fromKabah-Langa to KwaNobuhle, a designatedarea for “Black” occupation. KwaNobuhle wasan unsafe area infested by snakes and

unsuitable for human occupation.

The Kabah-Langa Phase 1 land was settled on 6September 2002. This phase comprised1 749 claimants, including their directdescendants, who were dispossessed of rights tobeneficial occupation of council-owned land,described as Portion 1 of erf 1 and Portion 1 of erf6. Out of a total of 1 749 claimants, 1 714 opted forfinancial compensation to the value of R 84 534790. The claimants are committed to using thisf i n a n c i a l c o m p e n s a t i o n t o w a r d s t h eimprovement of their homes, the four-roomedhouses that they are currently occupying atKwaNobuhle Township.

Thirty-five of the claimants have opted for landand are the beneficiaries of a Greenfields housingdevelopment near Kabah, from where they wereoriginally removed. The Nelson MandelaMetropolitan Municipality (NMMM) hasagreed to be the implementing agent of theGreenfields project and the Town Treasurer ofUitenhage has been authorised to retain thedevelopment component of the restitutionaward in a separate trust account. The totalvalue of the award, including grants for the 35claimants who have opted for land for residentialhousing development, is R 86 550 680.

Phase 2 of the project comprises some 1500claimants, whose verification has to becompleted, and has been prioritised forsettlement during the next financial year.

The Luswazi family occupied the land from 1891.

Kabah-Langa

Luswazi family claim

GautengBig Three settled in September 2002

13

They were dispossessed of their rights as aresult of the past racial practices. The area inthe Goxe Valley in the Mt. Currie district wasproclaimed a "Black spot" in terms of the GroupAreas Act (Act 41 of 1950). The area was thendesignated for ownership by Whites only.

During 1959, the Luswazi family was forced tosell their farm, subsequent to their farm beingproclaimed a "Black spot". They were left withno option but to sell their property at a pricealready determined by the government of thetime. This coercion was done under falsepretences of a "voluntary sale" . Nocompensatory land was offered to the familyand they had to devise means of findingalternative accommodation.

This claim was settled on 7 December 2002 inthe Mt. Currie District, near Kokstad. Anamount of R 365 445 was transferred to thecurrent owner for the acquisition of the farm.Some 625,8837 ha were restored to sevenverified households with 34 individualbeneficiaries. The beneficiaries will use thefarm for agriculture and stock-farming.

The Mankanku family occupied and used theland since 1909, when it was transferred andregistered under Sikhunyana Mankanku videTitle Deed no.T4919/1909. After Sikhunyana'sdeath in 1931 Estate was then administered bythe Native Commissioner in terms of theNative Administration Act of 1927. TheMankanku area also in the Goxe Valley wasproclaimed a "black spot" in terms of the GroupAreas Act, Act 41 of 1950 hence the family losttheir land rights.

Attempts by the claimant family to resist theremoval failed and in 1951 the dispossessionwas subsequently effected when the land wasexpropriated in terms of Section 13(2) ofNative Trust and Land Act, no18 of 1936, asamended.

This claim was settled on 7 December 2002.The family is comprised of six households and36 individual beneficiaries. The total size of theclaimed land is 571,2817 hectares. The familyalso received R 26 640 in restitutiondiscretionary and settlement planning grants.

For this Mankanku claim, the acquisition of thefarm from the current owner cost an amount of R480 000.

In 1998, Mr Stanley Philip Japhta and MrsDesiree M Macdonald lodged a claim with theLand Claims Commission on behalf of theSeventh Day Adventist Church. This land claimwas settled on 6 September 2002. An award of R183 000 was paid to the church as compensationfor the original church and property, of whichthey were dispossessed.

Mr Gerald Nickall lodged the Nickall familyclaim on 19 May 1995, on behalf of the survivingdirect descendants of the late Thomas Nickall.The Nickall family originally owned property inthe town of Fort Beaufort. The propertyconsisted of erven 1481 and 1468. Erf 1481, knownas 3 Grahamstown Street, Fort Beaufort,comprised 942m² and erf 1468 in CharlotteStreet, Fort Beaufort, comprised 4551m².

The coming to power of the National Party in1948 brought painful changes to the inhabitantsof this town. Like many other towns in thecountry, Fort Beaufort was demarcated alongracial lines, as required by the provisions of theGroup Areas Act of 1950, as amended. Thismeant that certain areas were occupiedexclusively by certain race groups. In 1964, theNickall family and other “non-White” familieshad to move from the town, which had beenallotted to Whites, to their “own areas”.

Mankanku family claim

Seventh Day Adventist Church claim in theCacadu area

Nickall family claim

th

14

This claim, comprising 1 2197 hectares, wasrestored to 16 beneficiaries in November 2002.

A total of 1 455 claims were lodged on behalf ofLady Selborne, Eastwood and Claremont.Some 151 claimants opted for land in terms of aservice site in Suiderberg, Pretoria, to the valueof R 16 000 and an additional R 24 000 infinancial compensation. Other claimantsopted for financial compensation to the valueof between R 40 000 and R 50 000. A total of R57, 6 million has been allocated to thesettlement of these claims. Title deeds werehanded over to claimants at a celebration heldon 28 September 2002.

The Batlhaping Boo Thakganyane communitylodged this claim in August 1995. Thiscommunity was removed from the farm,Kleincwain 519 IN, during 1966, in accordancewith Bantu Trust and Land Act 18 of 1936. Theland has been restored to 1 200 beneficiariesand will be used for agriculture.

The Legal Resource Centre lodged the claim onbehalf of Bakwena ba Mare a Phogole in July1996. A total of 872,8060 hectares of land wererestored to 300 households, consisting of 1 200beneficiaries.

Seven families are already occupying housesthat have been supplied with electricity, withthe assistance of Eskom. The total cost of theclaim is R 1,8 million.

Settlement agreement was reached with allparties to lease the area back from EckraalQuarries (Pty) Ltd. for a period of five years,with an annual increment of 7,5%. Theproposed township plan was comprised of fourphases, with each phase incorporating 900plots. Some 1380 hectares of property wererestored, with 200 hectares being used formining ore and the rest remaining unused.

The findings of the socio-economic survey werethat 58% were women, over the age of 40,heading households, some 32% of the people inthe radius of the claim area were employed, 8%were unemployed and 2% were self-employed.

The total settlement cost was R 19,5 million. Thesettlement celebration was held on 1 June 2002.

This claim was settled in April 2002, with 2000community members from 600 householdsbecoming beneficiaries on a land comprising 2611 hectares, which was restored in title. TheManavhela community was shocked to hearfrom the Native Commissioner that a returningveteran of the First World War, Ben Lavin, wasthe new owner of the land on which they wereliving.The members of Manavhela community whoremained temporarily on the farm were turnedinto farm labourers and were forced to workthree to nine months a year in exchange forstaying on the farm, or risk being issued withnotices to leave the farm, if they were reluctantto abide by the condition. When delivering akeynote address, the MEC for Agriculture, DrAaron Motsoaledi, exceeded expectations bydelivering more than a speech. Dr Motsoaledipledged to train beneficiaries to help establish anabattoir, which is now being effectivelymanaged.

The negotiated joint management agreementregarding the game reserve resulted in the namebeing changed to Manavhela Ben Lavin GameReserve

The Dzwerani land claim was settled inFebruary 2003 at a function attended by theMEC for Agriculture, Dr Motsoaledi.

The victims of dispossession in this case areTsonga-speaking people who were dumped inMalamulele in the former National Party'spursuit to consolidate the homelands systemgovernment. The claimants entered into ahousing development agreement with theMinister of Agriculture when restoration wasn't

Big Three

Kleincwain

Klipgat

Rama

Manavhela

Dzwerani

.

GAUTENG AND NORTH-WEST

LIMPOPO: NORTHERN PROVINCE

Kwazulu-NatalMangethe settled in November 2002

15

feasible, due to other people living on theirformer land.

Some 230 Reconstruction and DevelopmentProgramme-styled houses, valued at more thanR 5 million, are to be erected at Lombardvillage, where the claimants are currentlysettled. Construction started in February2003. The houses are built with the followingspecification: four-roomed partitioned housesof 45 square metres, with Nu-Tech roof sheets,Mid-way Maxi Bricks and interior Mercenitedoors with locks and a bathroom.

Some 265 New Look claimants recentlyreceived financial compensation from theirchosen settlement option after it wasn'tfeasible to restore lost land rights, due todevelopments. The claimants receivedcompensation in respect of lost land rights atNew Look, New Look Extension andLerouxville Location, situated in PietersburgExtension 17, next to Nelson Mandela Drive.

The Apartheid-motivated removal happenedin stages, from 1967 to 1982. The communitymembers were relocated to Seshego, wherethey used council houses without anyconsultation.

This claim was for the restoration of 250families of Colenso, who were dispossessed oftheir unregistered labour tenancy rights, interms of Government Notice 2255, dated 6December 1968. This notice dealt with theabolition of the labour tenants' system in theWeenen, Estcourt and Colenso districts. Theinhabitants were informed that, in terms of thenotice, only those who chose to become full-time labourers could remain on the land.

In 1998, Isaac Khumalo lodged a claim on behalfof the whole community that had fallen victimto this racial legislation. The total extent of theclaimed properties is 7292,6455 hectares.

T h e d i s p o s s e s s i o n o f t h e c l a i m a n tcommunity's rights to land was executed from

the late 1960s until the 1990s. The claimantsreceived no compensation at the time ofdispossession.

The State committed R 13 million to thesettlement of this claim. The settlement packageconsisted of land for residential purposes, game-farming and subsistence agriculture. Thecommunity also received a title deed for therestored land. The settlement ceremony washeld on 01 March 2003.

This claim was submitted on behalf of 199claimants, who lost their right to land, due to theracially based Dunn Distribution Land Act (Act15 of 1935). The objective of this legislation wasto make the area an exclusive reserve for the“Coloured” community, in line with raciallybased land allocation. The claim was for 1196,7hectares of land.

Before this legislation, the descendants of JohnDunn lived together with the affected claimantsin Reserve 7A, commonly known as Mangethe.The removals were carried out in the 1970s, incompliance with the Dunn Distribution LandAct. The claimants were dumped in the BantuTrust land, Wangu, notwithstanding theirresistance to move.

The claimants have been restored to their land,currently consisting of commercial sugar canefarms and land for subsistence farming andresidential purposes, as well as a title deed. Thiswill ensure that the claimants will never again bereduced to the level of land beggars. The State

New Look

Msuluzi/Khumalo

Mangethe

KWAZULU-NATAL

16

committed R 14 million towards thesettlement. This claim was settled inNovember 2002.

In 1905, New Ermelo, in the Ermelo MagisterialDistrict, was established as a freeholdtownship on portion 100 (a portion ofportion 5) of the farm, Witbank 262 IT. Some 4000 Black people were dispossessed of theirr i g h t s a n d l o d g e drestitution claims for theirrespective properties. In1956, New Ermelo had 589stands. The Black peoplealready had title deeds to421 erven but the rest ofthe erven were still inWhite hands. Some 55 ofthe 168 properties stillowned by Whites at thetime were, however, in thep r o c e s s o f b e i n gtransferred to Blackbuyers. Section 20 ofGroup Areas Act 77 of 1957then summarily declaredNew Ermelo a WhiteG r o u p A r e a . I np r e p a r a t i o n f o r t h eexecution of the massremoval of Blacks fromNew Ermelo, municipalofficials painted hugebright numbers on eachhouse.

Most of the residents of New Ermelo weremoved to Pumula, now Wesselton, a locationfor Blacks about two kilometres outsideErmelo. Some moved to other homelands,while a few relocated to the surrounding Blacktownships of Johannesburg, including Soweto,of their own accord. Others left South Africa tosettle in Swaziland.

Some 248 households, who fell victim to thisdispossession, have accepted financialcompensation to the amount of R 11 021

million. The settlement ceremony was held inJune 2002.

The claimants are members of the Botshabelocommunity. The Botshabelo community wasdispossessed of its land rights on eight farms inand around the Middelburg District inMpumalanga Province.

The portions of land under claim were theproperty of the Berlin Mission and wereregistered in the name of Alexander Merensky.

The community used theland for ploughing andcattle-grazing. They hadnumerous facilities, suchas the church, the school, aseminary for trainingB l a c k e v a n g e l i s t s , ateachers' training college,two hostels, teachers'quarters and houses.

The removal of Blackc o m m u n i t i e s f r o mBotshabelo was executedon the basis that theformer government soughtto eliminate rent tenancy,by means of the NativeLand Act, in Middelburgtown. In terms of theDevelopment Trust andLand Act of 1913 and Act 18of 1936, all Blacks residingi n B o t s h a b e l o w e r eregarded as squatters.

In 1960, it was decided that these “squatters”should be resettled in the scheduled areas, asdefined by the Act of 1913, or the so-called“released areas”, as defined by the Land Act of1936. In August 1970, the Berlin Mission sold theBotshabelo Mission to the MiddelburgMunicipality. Between 10 and 14 January 1972,about 160 families were removed to Motetema.

Some 700 households have been restored to theirland, which comprises 5 908,4832 hectares. Themonetary value of the claim was R 8,435 million.Tourism will be the dominant enterprise on theland in the future. Mainly grain crops are

New Ermelo

Botshabelo

MPUMALANGA

Mpumalanga:Botshabelo settled in September 2002

17

produced and there is also land for animal-grazing. The transfer ceremony was held inSeptember 2002.

In 1978, Kromkrans in the Carolina district wasexpropriated, in terms of various notices, bythe former Department of Co-operation andD e v e l o p m e n t a n d t h e n o w d e f u n c tDepartment of Bantu Affairs . Afterexpropriation, the land was transferred to theState.

The community consisted of variousindividuals, who held title and entered into anagreement of sale on the farm Kromkrans 208IS in the Ermelo Magisterial district, around1917.

Some 400 households, who were affected bythe dispossession, have received 2 146 hectaresof land. The restored land will be used foragricultural purposes, such as grazing,livestock-farming and crop production. Ahousing project will also be established. Thesettlement celebration was held in August2002. The value of the claim was R 1,5 million.

Moutse is a settlement area situated about 30kilometres west of Groblersdal and was hometo about 120,000 families. The communitieswere all enjoying the benefits in Moutse,regardless of their ethnic origin.

In 1962, when the government created theLebowa Territorial Authority for the NorthernSotho people, Moutse was included. The SouthAfrican government promised the people ofMoutse that they would not be incorporatedinto KwaNdebele.

During this time, the South Africangovernment shifted its policy from forcefullyremoving people from their land to introducinga State policy to incorporate communities intotheir respective homelands. The removal byincorporation into this particular area startedin 1977, notwithstanding the community'sstrong objections. The final removals wereeffected during the period 1986-1987.

The 200 affected households have receivedfinancial compensation to the amount ofR 4 100 000. The transfer ceremony was held inDecember 2002. The financial compensationpaid out to claimants will help to improve theircurrent housing and infrastructure.

The Mlambo Mahlalela community lost theirrights to land around 1935, due to forcedremovals aimed at paving the way for Whiteoccupation. They used to occupy the farmCastilhopolus 452 JU and the adjacent farms,namely, Avondstond 425 JU, Ingwenya 409 JU,Anyone 420 JU and Merriebeek 551 JU, in theBarberton District.

The community was dispossessed of itsbeneficial rights to land, which includedoccupational rights and rights to grazing,cultivation, medicinal harvesting, grass forthatching and firewood collection. They werealso deprived of their rights to practise culturalactivities and hunt.

The dispossession was carried out in line withBlack Land Act 27 of 1913 and DevelopmentTrust and Land Act 18 of 1936. Some 1 559,2308hectares of land were acquired for agriculturalpurposes to benefit 400 households. The value ofthe claim was R 19,5 million. The settlementceremony was held in February 2003.

The Ndebele tribe arrived in Kafferskraal in theGroblersdal district around 1800 and remainedthere until their removal in 1939. In 1940, theMapochs Gronden Water Commonage Act (Act40 of 1916) was promulgated. Act 14 of 1923 andAct 19 of 1937, respectively, subsequentlyamended this Act and were used to execute theremovals.

The community was removed for two mainreasons, namely, for the construction of theRooikraal Dam and because the governmentwanted to establish the Ndebele homeland. Thecommunity of Kafferskraal and other familiesliving on surrounding farms were given “Trekp a s s e s ” t o m o v e t o K w a D l a u l a l e i nNooitgedacht. The claimants lost their rights to

Kromkrans 208 IS

Elandskraal

Castilhopolus 452 JU

Kafferskraal 181 JS

18

occupation and cultivation of the land, grazingand cultural rites, such as access to ancestralgraves and initiation ceremonies.

On 12 November 2002, about 400 claimanthouseholds received land in the Groblersdaldistrict, comprising 2 321,3459 hectares. Theland will be used for commercial agricultureand for tourism ventures. The value of the claimis R 2,5 million.

In 1905, the KwaMadala Native Location,situated about 30 km from Ermelo, wasestablished as a freehold township on portion 7,a portion of portion 5, of the Smutsoog 214 IS.The claimants were some of the Native Locationresidents and had permission to occupy standsowned by the Town Council of Breyten.

In 1968, the claimants were removed from theKwaMadala location to KwaZanele township,some 10 km away from the town Breyten. Four-roomed rental houses were allocated to theclaimants.

On 6 February 2003, some 245 householdsreceived financial compensation, which will beused to improve their present housing andinfrastructure.

During the last part of the 19 century, theBakone Ba Phetla community moved into theLydenburg district and settled around an area,which was later known as De Kafferskraal.According to the claimants, Mr Japie Smithpurchased the farm after the First World War.

Mr Smith expected the claimants to subjectthemselves to labour tenancy, in accordancewith the provision of Transvaal Squatter Law 21of 1895. In 1937, the claimants weredispossessed of their land by the then Apartheidgovernment.

On 22 March 2003, the claimant community ofabout 500 households received land comprising1 574,1349 hectares, in the Lydenburg district.This land will be used for agriculture and theclaimants also have a lease agreement withAquarius Mining Company.

In 1959, the claimants were forcibly removedfrom their land, in terms of the Developmentand Land Act of 1936. The dispossession wasracially motivated in that it was regarded as aBlack Spot removal. The farm, Groenfontein, isone of the farms that Alexander Merensky of theBerlin Missionary Society and some Christians,including Johannes Dinkwanyane, half-brotherof Bapedi Chief Sekhukhune, purchased inJanuary 1871.

On 07 November 1925, Mr Jeremiah Makuseand eight other persons bought Portion 3 of thefarm, Groenfontein 266 JS, from the BerlinMission, for the amount of £ 1 575. On 20December 1926, the land was transferred to thenine people under Title Deed T13803/26. In 1961,the said portion was apparently registered inthe State's name without informing theclaimants, under Deed of Transfer No. 10971/61.Hence, when the removals took place in 1959,the community never received compensation.

The claimants are the direct descendants of theoriginal buyers of the farm under claim. Thecommunity used land for ploughing andgrazing. They attended school and church inBotshabelo (Toevlugt). The community alsoused the same burial graves at Botshabelo.

In 1959, after about 35 years, the communitywas dispossessed of their rights to land, interms of the Native Trust and Land Act (Act 18of 1936). The Groenfontein Ramohlakanecommunity had registered rights to land. Thecommunity was also dispossessed of theirbeneficial rights to land, which included

Breyten

Bakone Ba Phetla

Groenfontein

th

Mpumalanga:Botshabelo settled in September 2002

Kwazulu-NatalMsuluzi settled in March 2003/Khumalo

19

occupational rights. Other rights includedresidential, grazing and crop rights.

In March 2003, the 400 claimants received landrestoration comprising 599, 4953 hectares

Blanco is a small settlement on the outskirts ofGeorge and dispossessed families acquiredproperties in the area from as early as 1884.Group Areas Act 41 of 1950 was proclaimed inthe Cape Province on 31 March 1950.Subsequent amendments were consolidated inthe Group Areas Amendment Act (Act 77 of1957) and this Act was implemented in Blancoby means of Proclamation 143 of 1959. A part ofBlanco was declared a White Group Area interms of the Act and people of colour living inthis area were systematically removed from thispart of Blanco between 1960 and 1976.

Twenty-one former owners, who lodged landclaims for 30 dispossessed properties, receivedan overall amount of R 1 200 000 as financialcompensation for lost property. The transferceremony took place on Saturday, 6 April 2002.

Initially, the Protea Village settlement, situateddirectly below Rhodes Drive and theKirstenbosch Botanical Gardens, was thedwelling-place of the former slaves of the ProteaEstate, predating 1835.

In 1957, a substantial area around TableMountain was proclaimed a White Group Area,in terms of Proclamation No. 190 of 1957. In1959, the inhabitants living in the BishopscourtEstate area were removed and had to findaccommodation in areas like Lansdowne,Steenberg and Retreat.Between 1960 and 1964, a number of householdsliving in the Stegmann cottages tried to savethemselves the trauma of a sudden forcedremoval and also moved to Lansdowne,Steenberg and Retreat. A long wave of removalsfrom the Stegmann Cottage area began in 1965and reached a peak in 1968.

Financial compensation amounting to R 805000,00 was paid to 46 former tenants. Thesettlement ceremony took place in May 2002.

In terms of the Group Areas Act (Act 77 of 1957),the claimants were dispossessed in the 1960sand early 1970s. Most of the dispossessedpropert ies were developed erven inFranschhoek and some claims were submittedagainst the town's commonage, whereclaimants lived on an undivided portion of thecommonage. This land was expropriated fromboth Coloured and White landowners for thepurpose of settling “new” Coloured residents inthe area.

The unique feature of this settlement agreementis that it made room for the land claims receivedfrom the Franschhoek area. The Municipality ofFranschhoek/Stellenbosch subsequentlydonated five hectares of prime municipalcommonage land adjacent to Bloekombosch tothe claimants. The claimants then sold threehectares of the land to developers for R 1,2million, which will form part of a wine estate tobe developed. The claimants then decided toutilise the R 1,2 million to develop the remainingtwo hectares of their land.

The Commission further handed a total amountof R 2 146 560, as financial compensation for theloss of land rights in various parts ofFranschhoek and Le Roux Town, to 48 formerowners, tenants and their families. Thesettlement celebration took place onDecember 2002.

Blanco George

Ex-Protea Village Tenants Kirstenbosch

Franschhoek

WESTERN CAPE

SETTLED RESTITUTION CLAIMS

Number of Claims Settled

Households Involved

Beneficiaries

Land Restored: Hectares

FINANCIAL DETAILS

Land Cost

Financial Compensation

Restitution Discretionary Grant

Settlement and Planning Grant

Solatium

Total Award Cost

36 489

88 447

457 094

571 232

R 442, 426, 502.39

R 1, 278, 881, 685.12

R 136, 440, 000.00

R 48, 111, 342.01

R 6, 196, 000.00

R 1, 912, 055, 529.52

20

Numbers of Claims Settled as at 31 March 2003

CUMULATIVE SETTLED CLAIMS AS AT MARCH 2003

CUMULATIVE STATISTICS ON SETTLED CLAIMS AS AT MARCH 2003

36 48943 205

TOTAL NUMBERS OF VALID LAND CLAIMS: 79 694

Total numbers of claimsto be Settled

Total numbers of claimsSettled as at 31 March

The Claims Validation Campaign revealed thata large number of claim forms lodged were infact in respect of a number of land parcels/landrights lost. In the West Bank claim in EastLondon for example, only 800 claim forms werelodged and registered whilst the analysis of theland rights lost confirmed that in fact therewere 2 032 claims. This has been true withmost of the urban claims. This has resulted inthe increase in the number of claim formslodged of 68 878 to the valid claims of 79 694.

The validation campaign also revealed thatthere were competing (duplicate) claims insome provinces and this has led to the decreasein the number of claims in those provinces.This duplication resulted from the rush to lodgeclaims before the closing date where differentpeople from the same community lodged aclaim in respect of the same property. Suchclaims were common in rural areas and we havesince consolidated them. Rural claims formabout 20% of the valid claims.

21

THE VALIDATION PROJECT

CONSERVATION CLAIMS

COMMONAGE CLAIMS

During June 2001, the Honourable Minister ofAgriculture and Land Affairs, Ms ThokoDidiza, launched the Claims ValidationProject. The aim of this project was to dopreliminary research on 37 838 outstandingclaims lodged and to establish thevalidity of the claims. Completion of theproject was envisaged for the end of June 2002.

The Department of Land Affairs (DLA) and theCommission sought support for the validationcampaign from a number of donors. TheB e l g i a n E m b a s s y a n d t h e N a t i o n a lDevelopment Agency (NDA) responded to theplea. The NDA set up a call centre for theCommission, with a toll-free number thatclaimants could contact regarding thevalidation campaign. The Belgian Embassyprovided financial support of 1,4m Euros,which is equal to about R 13 213 990.

Some of the work was outsourced to serviceproviders, while dedicated staff members ofthe Commission performed other tasks in-house.

When it became evident that more work stillneeded to be done, even beyond the set period,the Land Claims Commission approached theMinister for an extension until the end ofDecember 2002. Extension was granted, due tothe fact that the Minister regards finalisationof this project as a high priority.

By the end of March 2003, some 36 940 claimforms were validated. Only 998 claims are stilloutstanding, which will be validated duringthe next financial year.

The challenges encountered during the claimsvalidation project included incompleteinformation on the claim form, for example, nocontact numbers or addresses , andunavailability or inaccessibility of claimants,d e s p i t e s e v e r a l h o m e v i s i t s , r a d i oannouncements and articles in local

newspapers. Incomplete property description,articulation and proof of dispossession,especially with regard to unregistered andunsurveyed land, also caused delays.Notwithstanding all these challenges, the LandClaims Commission is committed to do its bestto ensure that all lodged claims are validated.

The Land Claims Commission received anumber of claims regarding conservation land,mostly in the Eastern Cape, KwaZulu-Natal, theNorthern Cape, Mpumalanga and North-West.Discussions on how to settle these conservationclaims in the interest of all South Africans are inprogress with the various stakeholders,including other government departments, suchas the Department of Environmental Affairs andTourism.

In the Eastern Cape, for example, discussions areunderway with the South African NationalRoads Agency on the impact of the newproposed national toll road (N12 toll road) onsome of the claims, such as Mkambati and Silaka,as this proposed toll road will cut across many ofthe claimed areas.

A commonage indaba was held in the EasternCape to consider proposals on how to deal withcommonage claims. All local governmentstructures, including district municipalities,were invited and participated in thisnoteworthy workshop. Many proposals wereadvanced and some agreement was reached withdistrict municipalities on how best to resolvethese claims. The Land Claims Commission is inthe process of drafting a report and a documentthat will serve as a guideline for the settlement ofcommonage claims.

Most commonage claims are in Flagstaff, Bizana,Mt Frère, Idutywa, Ngqamakwe, Willowvale,Mgwali and Tabankulu.

prima facie

NATIONAL REPORTSpecial Projects

22

FORESTRY CLAIMS

CLAIMS ON INTEGRATED RURALDEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME (IRDP)NODAL POINTS

There are 23 valid forestry claims in the EasternCape. Eight of these claims are in Amatole, twoin Tsitsikamma and thirteen in Umzimkuluand Singisi in the former Transkei. KwaZulu-Natal received 48 claims, Limpopo received 13claims and Mpumalanga 35 valid forestryclaims. One of the challenges facing the LandClaims Commission with regard to the forestryclaims is that the land is unsurveyed and therights lost were unregistered.

Guidelines obtained from discussions with theDepartment of Water Affairs and Forestry(DWAF) and the Department of InternationalDevelopment (DFID) should be taken intoaccount when dealing with forestry claims.These are:

• Title ownership of land should betransferred to claimants.

The long-term lease of 70 years, as proposed byDWAF, remains a contentious issue, becauseclaimants believe it favours potential investors.Most critical are the term of the lease, thefairness of rentals and the framework of thesettlement of claims.

Throughout the past year, the alignment of theLand Claims Commission's priorities withmunicipal Integrated Rural DevelopmentPlanning (IRDP) processes has been raised as a

major critical issue. All line function or sectordepartments have been challenged to adhere tothe collaborative efforts initiated andcoordinated through the IRDP and IntegratedDevelopment Planning (IDP) frameworks.

In 1946, the Makhoba community was removedi n t e r m s o f s u b s e c t i o n 5 o f N a t i v eAdministration Act 38 of 1927. The claimantswanted restoration of their land, which iscommonly known as Springfontein Farm No.112.The land under claim comprises 14 portionssituated in the Kokstad Magisterial District.

The land where the Makhoba people currentlyreside falls under the Umzimvubu Municipalityin the Eastern Cape.

Mr Mpepezi lodged this claim on behalf of theCaguba community. From 1922 through to thelate 1950s, this community was dispossessed ofland, as a result of forest demarcation Acts in thearea known as Mt. Thesiger Forest. The otherareas affected by dispossession were Silaka andsome farms along the Umzimvubu River, thoughnot for the same reasons. This claim is at theresearch stage and will be settled by the end ofthe next financial year.

The Bakwena-ba-Matlhaku-ba-Modimosanacommunity, comprising 800 households, wasdispossessed of its property from 1933. Thedispossession was executed in terms of Marico-Bosveld Irrigation Scheme Act 10 of 1932.

A total of 2505,9499 hectares have beentransferred to the Areboetse CommunalProperty Association and the total cost forsettlement was R 12 million. In principle, theCommission has managed to secure agreementswith Eskom, DACEL and MKTV for businessventures, such as chicken broilers and tobaccoand agricultural production. The communityhas the advantage of the Platinum Corridorinternational road, which passes through thearea, as this will enable them to participate in theglobal economy.

• Land use should remain unchanged(forestry).

• Claimants should have equity shares and ameaningful flow of benefits from thebusiness.

• Lease agreements should be concludedwith successful investors/developers/operators.

• Rentals should be market-related.

• Meaningful skills should be transferred tolocal people.

Makhoba: Kokstad

Caguba/Silaka Reserve: Port St. Johns

Mooiland and Zamenskomst: North-West

23

It is within this context that the Commission isnot just addressing the injustices of the pastbut is also contributing to poverty alleviationand development. In this way, the Commissionwill be shifting the frontiers of poverty bycreating employment, empowering womenand participating in the global economy withcommunities, so that they can be responsiblefor their livelihood.

The history of Alexandra left many citizensdisadvantaged, as they couldn't hold titledeeds to their properties. The situation led to

the birth of the urban renewal project, whichaims to improve life in Alexandra.

The Regional Land Claims Commission,Gauteng and North-West, offered Alexandraclaimants financial compensation. Agreementwas reached with the council and the currentdeveloper responsible for the urban renewalprogramme, Settlement Dynamics, thatclaimants would be allowed to use the R50000 received as a restitution award to buyinto the housing renewal project. Throughthis agreement, the Commission ensured thatclaimants would be provided with title deedsto their properties. Several Alexandraresidents have also been provided withtemporary employment opportunities, as theyare assisting with the construction of houses.

Alexandra: Gauteng

URBAN RENEWAL PROGRAMMECLAIMS

Office: Chief Land Claims Commissioner

PROGRESS MADE ON THE SETTLEMENT OF RESTITUTION CLAIMS AS AT 31 MARCH 2003

PROVINCEEastern Cape

Free StateNorthern Cape

Kwazulu-NatalLimpopo

MpumalangaGauteng

North WestWestern Cape

TOTAL

1995/20001 2000/2001 2001/2002 2002/20032 TOTAL628404402

1328

32 571

273 8158 179

1 8244

381 407

269381

1 8763

8076 609

11 0451 152450

8 640777635

7 3731 0535 363

36 488

6 324742

16 814

178254

2 115662696

17 783

2 26929

41820

81136145

3 917

1

2

A total of 41 restitution claims were settled during the period of 1995 1999. Most of these were settled through theLand Claims Court. The introduction of S42D amendment enabled the Minister to Settled claims, hence theincrease from the year 1999/2000 onwards.

Our focus during the year ended 31 March 2003 was on settling rural claims. These appear to be small in number butthey constitute large communities with many beneficiaries as well as vast tracks of land. An average rural claimtakes two years to process and we are determined to reduce this to one year.

24

PROFILEProfileMembers of the Commission

NCEBA NQANA

NRegional Land Claims Commissioner: Mpumalanga

ceba Nqana was born in Eastern Cape. He matriculated at Blythswood high school and holds a MSC(Agric) degree, majoring in Crop production which he achieved in exile in the Czech Republic . Heattended a management programme at the Southern African Management Institute and in 1989

completed an advanced Diploma in Farm Management at Bishop Burton College in the UK. He is currently inthe process of completing his Minst Agrar degree in Rural Development at the University of Pretoria.

His involvement in politics and the ANC saw Nceba Nqana move from Swaziland to Tanzania, the CzechRepublic the United Kingdom and eventually Zimbabwe between period 1981 and 1992 . In 1992 he returned to SouthAfrica where he worked for agricultural research institute (ADRI) at the University of Fort Hare and was a RegionalManager at the agricultural parastatal (TRACOR), for 5 years.

In 1997 he worked at the Department of Agriculture in Gauteng responsible for West for food security programme untilhis appointment as Regional Land Claims Commissioner for Mpumalanga in 2001.

SUGAR RAMAKARANE

TRegional Land Claims Commissioner: Free State and Northern Cape

shepiso Rankgotho Ramakarane known as Sugar was born in Boipatong (Vanderbijl Park). He matriculated at Tseki

Senior Secondary School. He holds a B.Juris from the University of Zululand and a Diploma in Human Rights from

the Rand Afrikaans University Obtained in 1987 and 1996 respectively.

Between 1980-81 he was a student activist as an Executive Committee member of COSAS in QWA - QWA. From 1990-1994as a Unionist he served at leadership position within NEHAWU and was also a Chairperson of Cosatu Local during the sameperiod.

He was then deployed in Local Government at the beginning of 1995 where he was eventually elected president of the then NationalAssociation of Regional Local Government (Reglogov 1996-1997).

He also served in leadership positions at Branch, Regional and Provincial structures of the ANC. He is currently still an active member ofthe ANC.

1988-1994 served as a State Prosecutor. 1995 1997 was the Chairperson of the Regional Service Council in Eastern Free State. 1997 1999Advisor to the Premier in the Free State. 1999 2000 Special Advisor to the MEC for Safety and Security and in 2000 was appointedRegional Land Claims Commissioner for Free State and Northern Cape.

THOMAS THOZAMILE GWANYA

TActing-Chief Land Claims Commissioner

Regional Land Claims Commissioner: Eastern Cape

homas Thozamile Gwanya who is commonly known as Tozi was born in Eastern Cape. Heholds a B Comm degree, majoring in economics and business management. In addition he holdsa Diploma in Adult Education and a Diploma in Training and Human Resource

Management that was achieved at the Leicester University . He is currently in the process ofcompleting his Masters in Developmental Studies at the University of Port Elizabeth.

Tozi's community involvement spans a wide spectrum from establishing Childen Homes to alleviating poverty throughdevelopment . A few of the organisation that the latter represents is the Co- founder and Chairman of the ManagementBoard of Umzomtsha Children Home , Chairperson of Transkei Service Land Organization (TRALSO) , member of thePhilisisizwe Association for Development (PAD) ,Chairperson of Eastern Cape Appropriate Technology Unit and aDirector of Eastern Cape Socio Economic Consultative Council . In addition to the above he is also a Trustee on theRestitution Trust Fund ( RTF) and have delivered papers on strategic issues at a number of conferences in South Africalike SA Housing Renaissance and the role of the Commercial and Technical Education in Development .

Tozi's professional career commenced in 1975 as a clerk in the Transkie's Government, Department of Education . In 1982he was appointed as a Training Manager for the Africa Cooperative Action Trust (ACAT) until 1989 when he becameDeputy Director at the Bureau of Development and Training at the University of Transkei . The year 1994 saw Tozibecoming the Director of ACAT until he was appointed as Regional Land Claims Commissioner for Eastern Cape in 1999.

BEVERLEY JANSEN

BRegional Land Claims Commissioner: Western Cape

everley Jansen, a former teacher for almost 30 years holds qualifications in Dramaand Adult education from the University of Cape Town, as well as primary teacherqualifications from the Wesley Training College in Cape Town. Berverley trained as

a Radio Announcer, Radio Producer as well as Program Manager at Bush Radio and alsoworked for Workers in World Radio in Salt River on a part-time basis.She has extensive community work experience having founded a successful low costhousing development project of which she serves as chairperson and board member for thelast 12 years. Ms Jansen also worked as a full-time community facilitator for the last 5 years.

She was also a board member of Cape Flats Development Association and Valley Development Project. Shemade several contribution to Poetry collections, enjoys writing, having contributed to several short storycollections. She has received several awards for her contributions in community building.

25

ANDREW MAPHIRI MPHELA

A

Regional Land Claims Commissioner:Gauteng and North West.

ndrew Maphiri Mphela commonly known as Blessing was born in . He holds a B AAdmin degree and a Diloma in Public Management .

His involvement in the politics and the General workers union saw Blessing move from the ProvincialOrganiser of the General Workers Union in 1982 to the National Vice President of SASCO in 1984 . His

involvement with the liberation movement in the UDF, ANC and the Umkhonto weSizwe between the period 1985 to 1990resulted in Blessing being detained under the Internal Security Act and house arrest.

In his professional capacity , Blessing was initially a Marketing Director at the Community Based DevelopmentProgramme at the Wits Business School and was thereafter employed by the Department of Education in the LimpopoProvince as the Head of the Capacity Building Branch . He became the Provincial Director of the Department of LandAffairs for the Gauteng Province and is presently the Regional Land Claims Commissioner for Gauteng and North West.

Gauteng

MASHILE MOKONO

MRegional Land Claims Commissioner: Limpopo

ashile Mokono was born in Mankweng in the Limpopo Province. He matriculated at Hwiti High School in 1989and holds a B. Proc law degree from the University of the North (Turfloop). Mr. Mokono is currently reading foran M (Phil) degree on Land and Agrarian Studies with the University of Western Cape.

In 1995 he worked as a part time lecturer for African Law students at the University of the North, while studying for his finalyear LLB law degree of which he has two courses outstanding for its completion. In 1996 he became a Commercial Legalunderwriter at Protea Insurance Company in Johannesburg.

Mashile joined the Department of Land Affairs in June 1996 as a Restitution officer in the then Chief Directorate: Restitution. He later joined theGauteng Provincial office of Land Affairs in 1998

In 1999, Mashile's interest for Restitution allowed him the opportunity to tour Europe on a fact finding mission to investigate the land reformprocess as carried out in those countries. Some of the countries visited were Germany and Estonia and a detailed report was produced as part of theStudy tour partly funded by the Department of Land Affairs and the UNDP. In April 1999, Mashile joined the Land Claims Commission in Gautengafter which the State Property Holdings Directorate in the Department of Public Works beckoned him in May 2000.

In April 2001 Mashile was appointed as the Regional Land Claims Commissioner for Limpopo Province. He has managed to forge very goodrelations with various Provincial Departments and relevant Institution. His passion and drive for sustainable development has led to theestablishment of the Limpopo Agricultural Development Co-ordination Committee involving the Provincial Department of Agriculture, LandBank, Trade and Investment Limpopo and the Provincial Land Reform Office, which can be regarded as a guide model to co-operative governanceon land reform in South Africa.

THABI SHANGE

TRegional Land Claims Commissioner: KwaZulu-Natal

Thabi Shange was born in Kwangwanase in the Ingwavuma District in Northern KwaZulu-Natal.

She matriculated at St Theresa's Girls High in Manzini, Swaziland and holds three degrees, MBA degree in PublicSector Management with specialisation in Finance and Marketing, from the University of Exeter-UK, a BA Honoursin Development Studies from the University of Witwatersrand, a BA degree in History & Geography from theNational University of Lesotho and a certificate in Education from the William Pitcher Teachers' college in ManziniSwaziland.

Thabi is the founder of various women's organizations and rural community development associations. She founded and assisted inthe founding of Community Trusts and various other section 21 and (Pty) Ltd companies as vehicles for rural communitiesempowerment prior to her involvement in the Restitution work from 1988.

She has also served on a number of development oriented Boards or committees such as Natal Women' Organisation, Natal Women'sCentre, Transformation Resource Centre in Lesotho, Rural Transformation Association. Women's and Development Desks of theSouth African Council of Churches (SACC) and the Catholic Bishops' Conference (SACBC). She was involved as a member of theadvisory committee to the World Bank land Reform study where the three legs of the current Land Reform emanated.

Thabi's passion and commitment is in rural community upliftment and empowerment.

As a person, Thabi is a very strong-willed person, a strong “womanist”, who believes that there is a “mission to accomplish” in turning“mission impossible” to “mission possible”. Everything she does is “business” and she does not believe in facing the big challengeswith half big passion, commitment and ideas.

26

OVERVIEW

CLAIM HIGHLIGHTS

This year, we have settled seven importantrural betterment claims in Keiskammahoek,where Amahlati Local Municipality willfacilitate a development project involving thesupply of water, access roads, fencing andagriculture. The suppliers of building materialsin Uitenhage have confirmed that a number ofpeople from KwaNobuhle, who have receivedrestitution awards, have bought buildingmaterials for home improvements. Thesettlement of the Mankanku and Luswazifamily claims near Kokstad was a significantstep in addressing the land redistributionobjective (87:13% land ownership ratio).

The internal Claims Validation projectresulted in an increase in the number of urbanclaims to 14 728. Most of the individual claimswere lodged on one claim form while researchrevealed that all these claimants had individualclaims against the State, hence the increase.We focused on both rural and urban claimsduring this year. The total number of claimssettled this year was 1 761.

We have prioritised 5 389 claims to be settledover the next twelve months. Some of thesignificant claims to be settled include thefollowing:

This phase will deal with the 1821 non-verifiedclaimants of East Bank. Terms of reference havebeen drafted for a service provider who will doclaimant verification. The envisagedsettlement option will include bothrestoration and financial compensation. Thisclaim will be settled by July 2003.

This is a claim from a community of about 180

households. They were removed in the 1960s,due to the implementation of the Prevention ofIllegal Squatting Act of 1951. The mandate tonegotiate has been sent to the Minister forapproval. Claimants have expressed preferencefor financial compensation, as well asrestoration. The Nkonkobe Municipality is insupport of this claim and is prepared to releasethe land required.

The claim is for the restitution of land rights lostto 176 properties in five areas of the Hankeydistrict, namely Milton, Centreton, HankeyNorth and South and Weston. There are about480 households claiming more than 545 hectaresin these areas. These claims have been groupedand their total value is estimated at R 12 million

The Somerset East claim is a group claimcomprising 86 claimants. The claim is for landrights lost in rural Clevedon and parts ofSomerset East Town. Rights were lost due to theimplementation of Group Areas legislation. Theclaimants from Somerset East Town wantcompensation and those from Clevedon wantland.

The claim encompasses some 640 claims for therestitution of land rights formerly held in variousperi-urban and urban areas of the town of PortElizabeth, namely Veeplaas, Mount Pleasant,Central, Kleinskool, Sidwell, Neave Township,Bethelsdorp, Missionvale, Zwide, KwaZakheleand Emasimini. The project also includes a fewclaims from South End, Fairview, Korsten andSalisbury Park, excluded from the PELCRA 1agreement for various reasons. Forced removalswere executed in terms of Group Areaslegislation. The vetting of validated claims hasbeen concluded. The next stage is verifying theclaimants and then conducting the settlement

East Bank: Phase Two

Apiesdraai

Hankey

Somerset East Claim

Port Elizabeth (PE 2)

REGIONAL REPORTRegional ReportEastern Cape

27

options assessment.

There are 136 prioritised claims from theGraaff-Reinet area, including the Diocese ofGeorge Church claim and Hoffman familyclaim. The church lost its land rights to erven1505, 1506 and 1507 when it was compelled tosell its land because it was situated within theextended boundaries of the proposedextension of Umasizakhe and Graaff-Reinet.

The 135 Graaff-Reinet claimants for 540households are claiming land rights lost toerven 164 and 166. The families were forced tosell and coerced to relocate when the area inwhich the properties in question weresituated, was proclaimed a White Group area,in accordance with Group Areas DevelopmentAct 69 of 1955. Subsequently, the familiesacquired property in the Kroonvale Colouredarea. According to deeds records, the currentowner is the Graaff-Reinet Mutual BuildingSociety, which is no longer in existence. Theseclaims are valued at R 2,16 million and theclaimants prefer restoration.

• 73 dismissed claims

Graaff-Reinet

Achievements

Challenges

• 1 761 settled claims, involving more than 7319 households and more than 1843hectares and including Keiskammahoek(1704), Kabah-Langa (1749), Mankanku,Luswazi, Fatman and the Seventh DayAdventist Church

• 7 847 gazetted claims

• 1784 validated claims, internally (East Bank6500, Kaba Langa 1861, Aliwal North 220,Somerset 87), and 64, externally

• Appointment of new staff members

• Drafting of CPA document for Bosch BokKoppen and Lower Blink Water

• Registration of S21 Co-West Bank

• Implementation of Access to InformationAct (Information Officer appointed)

• Institutional arrangements for post-settlement stage (S21 Co, Trust) for Pelcra,West Bank, Chata, and Dwesa Cweb

• Linkages with district municipalities ofNelson Mandela Metropole, Nkonkobe, ORTambo and Ukwahlamba, among others,w h o a r e c o m m i t t e d t o p r o j e c timplementation support for settled claims

• Information-sharing (restitution) with themunicipalities of Ngquza, Umzimvubu,Mnquma and Mbizana

• Implementation of the Claims ValidationProject and communication strategy in theWestern, Chris Hani and Alfred Nzo regions

• Successful settlement celebrations forLuswazi and Mankanku claims

• Basic training on Landbase for all staffmembers, including super users

• Inadequate resource allocation and capacity(staffing, finance) for the Commission

• Effective management of service providers(CVP)

• Claimant verification (obtaining copies ofIDs, affidavits and birth/death certificatesand constructing family trees, among others)

• Landbase data capturing (by ProjectOfficers)

• Prolonged negotiation process

• The need to identify donors to fund post-settlement support for restitutionbeneficiaries

• Giving a clear project description, proposal,business plan and feasibility plan

• Most government officials are not informedabout processes outside their scope, forexample, restitution

ACHIEVEMENTS AND CHALLENGES

28

Strategic Partnership

• Department for International Development(DFID) and the Department of WaterAffairs and Forestry (DWAF) for forestryclaims

• National and provincial departments ofhousing and local government

• Metropole and district municipalities(Nelson Mandela Metropole and OR

Tambo/Chris Hani, among others)• Donors for post-settlement support and

development funding (SDC, NDA, BelgianEmbassy, among others)

• Claimant groups/legal entities

• Non-governmental Organisations like theBorder Rural Committee (BRC), TranskeiLand Service Organisation (TRALSO),Southern Cape Land Committee (SCLC),Surplus People's Project (SPP), amongothers.

EASTERN CAPE: CUMULATIVE SETTLED CLAIMS AS AT 31 MARCH 2003

SETTLED RESTITUTION CLAIMSNumber of claims settled 11 045Households involved 21 953Beneficiaries 106 507Land restored: Hectares 29 577

FINANCIAL DETAILSLand Cost R 97,587,594.50Financial Compensation R 405,300,961.38Restitution Discretionary Grant R 38,688,000.00Settlement and Planning Grant R 18,570,240.00Solatium 0Total award cost R 560,146,795.88

Eastern Cape Staff

29

OVERVIEW

CLAIMS HIGHLIGHTS

The year under review was characterised by arelative increment in the settlement of claimsin the history of this office. What is significantabout the claims resolved during this year isthat they were rural claims, which is alsohistorical. The claims included the Herschelclaim, comprising 7 998 hectares. Thesettlement package was a combination ofalternative land and financial compensation tosome 129 claimants, amounting to 588beneficiaries.

The claim regarding Palmietfontein wassettled on 27 April 2002. In 1988, the claimedland was forcefully taken from the legalowners, in accordance with a proclamation bythen State President PW Botha. This ruralclaim comprised three households and the landrestored was 1 860 hectares. The claimantswere given alternative land, as the original landwas converted into a dam and a game reserve.

Another claim, which is also a rural claim withregard to Andriesfontein, was settled on 7December 2002. What is interesting about theclaim is the fact that the original land that wasdispossessed was restored with additionalportions that were consolidated at the time ofdispossession. The total land handed over was204,7225 hectares. This is a family claimaffecting 12 households.

There was also an individual claim with regardto Dakpoort, which was settled duringDecember 2002.

The most historical claim to be celebratedduring the year under review was the KhomaniSan claim, on 31 August. The settlement of thisclaim heralded an era of sustainable land use,balanced with the preservation of our natureconservation. The claim involved no less than57 000 hectares of land. Part of the land had tobe released through the passing of legislationde-proclaiming land within the KgalagadiTransfrontier Park.

Majeng is also another historic claim, which wassettled through a court order on 6 April 2002.The judgment not only restored land but alsomineral rights. This will go a long way inempowering the community and alleviatingpoverty.

The Commission has set itself a target toincrease the pace of delivery in 2003/4 to no lessthan 1500 settled claims.

Bucklands is situated in the Herbert Districtnear Douglas. Dispossession of the communitytook place in phases between 1940 and the 1970s,in accordance with Settlement Act 21 of 1925.After being dispossessed from Bucklands, theGriqua community resided in several locationssurrounding the town of Douglas, namely,Bongani, Breipal, Valus, and Bucklands.

Twenty-one farms comprising 1657,1023hectares are implicated in this claim and about1900 individuals will benefit from the settlementof the claim.

It is envisaged that the claim will be settled inJune 2003.

This claim pertains to Kuruman. It comprises280 claimants, all of which have opted forrestoration of land. A total of 6821,6369 hectareswill be restored. Of the 180 households, 67 areheaded by women. Finalisation of the settlementis envisaged for June 2003.

The claim, pertaining to Khuise in Kuruman,was submitted by 214 households, of which 54are headed by women. The land comprises22489,5881 hectares and claimants are opting forrestoration of the land. This claim is at anadvanced stage and is earmarked for settlementin June 2003.

Bucklands

Groot Vlakfontein

Khuise

REGIONAL REPORTRegional ReportFree State and Northern Cape

30

Smauswani

Achievements

Challenges

Strategic Partnerships

Smauswani North, comprising 1377,5922hectares, and Smauswani South, comprising1378,2934 hectares, are situated in the Districtof Kuruman. This claim will benefit 70households, who have opted for restoration ofland. The claimants intended using the farmsfor agriculture. Negotiations with currentlandowners are underway.

• 789 settled claims

• 286 gazetted claims

• Municipalities not understanding therestitution programme

• I n a d e q u a t e r e s o u r c e a l l o c a t i o n(equipment, finance)

• Insufficient stakeholder support

• Developing a comprehensive plan forverification

• Insufficient capacity

• Lack of support from current landowners

• Land Bank assists claimants in accessing

funds for the purchase of agriculturalequipment.

• Local government and housing housing andtownship planning for claimants opting forTownship Development.

• Provincial Department of Agriculture, LandReform and Conservation - assists in theevaluation of farms, as well as capacity-building of claimants, who opted forrestoration of agricultural land.

• IEC in the event of any form of electionswithin the claimant community, the IEC isinstrumental.

• G o v e r n m e n t C o m m u n i c a t i o n a n dInformation Systems and the Multi-purposeCommunity Centres for purposes ofpublicity, advertising and informationdissemination.

• Food and Agricultural Organisation a newpartnership envisaged for capacity-buildingof claimants in the event of land restoration.This partnership will assist claimants tobecome self-sustained by means ofagriculture and food processing.

• Agricultural Union in normal practice, takesup issues that are in the interest of itsmembers. A conscious decision was taken tohold regular meetings with the Free StateAgricultural Union to discuss ways andmeans of resolving claims that concern thisbody. This has contributed to the resolutiono f t w o c l a i m s , n a m e l y Z o a r a n dBlesbokfontein.

ACHIEVEMENTS AND CHALLENGES

FREE STATE: CUMULATIVE SETTLED CLAIMS AS AT 31 MARCH 2003

SETTLED RESTITUTION CLAIMSNumber of claims settled 1 152Households involved 2 555Beneficiaries 13 678Land restored: Hectares 40 665

FINANCIAL DETAILSLand Cost R 7,569,017.22Financial Compensation R 11,568,269.31Restitution Discretionary Grant R 3,678,000.00Settlement and Planning Grant R 1,464,101.50Solatium 0Total award cost R 24,279,388.03

31

NORTHERN CAPE: SETTLED CLAIMS AS AT 31 MARCH 2003

SETTLED RESTITUTION CLAIMSNumber of claims settled 450Households involved 4 187Beneficiaries 20 938Land restored: Hectares 279 759

FINANCIAL DETAILSLand Cost R 56,944,011.29Financial Compensation R 4,742,606.00Restitution Discretionary Grant R 8,518,000.00Settlement and Planning Grant R 2,001,600.00Solatium 0Total award cost R 72,206,217.29

Northern Cape Staff

Free State Staff

32

OVERVIEW

CLAIMS HIGHLIGHTS

The Regional Land Claims Commission,Gauteng and North-West, completed thevalidation of 5 200 outstanding claims, ofwhich 3 300 will be settled in the 2003/2004financial year. The remaining 1 900 claims willbe settled in the 2004/2005 financial year.

The Commission has forged stronginstitutional alliances with provincialgovernments and local municipalities andmost claims that are in the process of beingsettled have been included in the IDP process.

In the past year, the Commission managed toresolve 99% of all legacy claims. These areclaims that were settled after only 10% ofresearch work had been completed on them.

In North-West, significant numbers of ruralclaims have been settled with regard to, amongothers, Byl, Concordia, Holgat, Koppieskraal,Khaukwe, Kleincwain, Klipgat, Mooiland andZamenskomst. Section 42 D submissions withregard to, for example, Barokologadi baM a o t w e , B l i n k k l i p p e n , B o o y s k r a a l ,Tampaansfontein and Tigerkloof are at anadvanced stage for claims. In Gauteng, claimswith regard to Wallmannsthal, Marabastad,Rama, Eastern Native Township, WesternNative Township and Klipriviersoog have beensettled. Section 42 D submissions and approvalare being awaited from Benoni, Brakpan,Alberton and Evaton.

The only outstanding major claims in Gautengstill to be settled are those with regard toVanderbijl Park, Meyerton and Top Location,all of which are situated in the Vaal Triangle,involving some 1 200 claimants in total. Theremaining Gauteng claims affect smallernumbers of people, with an average of 100claimants per claimed area.

The major challenge remains in North-West,where a significant number of claims are beingchallenged on the basis of compensation

received at the time of dispossession. Added tothis are the challenges posed by land NGOs, suchas the National Land Committee and LandAccess Movement of South Africa (LAMOSA),which often instigates communities to renege onvalid agreements reached between the RegionalLand Claims Commission (RLCC) andclaimants. Cases in point are Baphalane baSesobe and Barokologadi ba Maotwe, who haveboth lodged claims that affect part of MadikwePark. Conflict between members of thecommunity has resulted in certain claims beingreferred to court, as in the case of Makgokgoane.Some ten claims have been referred to court andare reflected in the latter section of this report.

Despite the challenges already mentioned, theRLCC, Gauteng and North-West, is determinedto complete all claims within the stipulated timeframe, by the year 2005.

The settlement approach to the claim lodged bythe Bahurutshe Boo Mokgatlhe tribe for theTshwaro community is unique. The office of theRLCC for Gauteng and North-West made use ofthe liquidation of some of the farms that will berestored to claimants. The total cost to beincurred for the claim amounts to 4,3 million,including grants payable to claimants, with asaving of R 995 000, according to the valuationprices determined on the land.

The community, comprising 500 households,will receive Portion 1 and Portion 23 of the farmKoppieskraal 73 JP, the remaining section ofPortion 67 of the farm Schuinsdrift 75 JP andPortion 1 and 3 of the farm Venture 83 JP inrestitution, amounting to 910, 9361 hectares.The fact that current farmworkers will beincluded in the settlement of the claim furtherdistinguishes the settlement.

The community intends to continue currentagricultural activities.

Koppieskraal

REGIONAL REPORTRegional ReportGauteng and North West

33

Booyskraal

Benoni, Brakpan and Alberton

Achievements

Challenges

The office of the RLCC used the same approachas with the abovementioned Koppieskraalclaim. In this respect, we were able to saveabout R700 000. The finalisation of this claimwill not only provide 500 restitutionhouseholds, but also current farmworkers,with the opportunity to be restored to thefarm. This goes a long way in meeting therequirements of Extension of Security ofTenure Act 62 of 1997.

About 757 claimants lodged claims with regardto Benoni, 613 with regard to Brakpan and 315with regard to Alberton. Removals took placeduring the 1960s, in terms of the Group AreasAct . Cla imants were removed fromRietfontein, Old Brakpan Location and OldAlberton Location.

Individual Government Gazette notices havealready been published for 389 Benoni claims,400 Brakpan claims and 168 Alberton claims, asthey have met the acceptance criteria set out inSection 2 of the Restitution Act.

The Commission intends settling these claimsby offering claimants the option of eitherfinancial compensation, or a serviced site in adevelopment in Ekurhuleni in the GreaterEastern Metropolitan Council, Johannesburg.

• The successful settlement of 3 800 claims inboth Gauteng and North-West in the year2002/2003. The above figure is inclusive of99% of all legacy claims settled this year.

Amidst these achievements, a few challengesremain.

• T h e s e t t l e m e n t o f M o o i l a n d ,Zamenskomst, Kleincwain and Klipgatwithin the integrated sustainable ruraldevelopment programme. Key elements ofthis strategy include a thorough socio-economic survey (SES) and the profiling ofclaimant needs, grouping these needs intoidentifiable categories, for example, foodgardens, subsistence farming and stockfarming. Other crucial elements include

project design based on identifiable needs; aninstitutional support framework, whichincludes implementation agreements withlocal municipalities and the provincialgovernment; resource mobilisation; trainingand capacity-building of claimants; technicalassistance; peer group review and sharedlearning; mentoring and coaching; skillsdevelopment; and indigenous knowledge-based strategies.

• The Commission has also settled claims inGauteng which provided claimants with anopportunity to participate in developmentopportunities. Lady Selborne, Claremontand Eastwood in Pretoria are part of the bigthree, where claimants have opted for landtransfer. Some 40 title deeds have alreadybeen issued to claimants who wish to resideon land restored to them. Eighty title deedsare being finalised. Payneville in Springs is avery successful project, perhaps like noother, where claimants have takenoccupation of huge four-roomed housesbuilt for them with the assistance of theCommission. Part of their restitution awardhas been used to build top structures. Theprovincial Department of Housing hasapproved subsidies for claimants who meetthe qualification criteria. Partnershipsbetween the Commission, the provincialDepartment of Housing, the claimants'committee and private contractorscontributed immensely to the success of thisproject. Other projects that are likely to besettled in a similar fashion are Pageview,K l i p t o w n , B e n o n i , B r a k p a n a n dWallmannsthal.

• The RLCC, Gauteng and North-West, wasthe first to complete the validation of allclaims and has gone further to embark on aconcerted verification campaign, which islikely to culminate in the resolutionand settlement of claims.

• The recalcitrance of a few landowners,assisted by rightwing individuals, who havelaunched a serious campaign to oppose

en masse

ACHIEVEMENTS AND CHALLENGES

34

claims and to stall negotiations. Otherssimply refuse to sell their properties or askexorbitant amounts that far exceed theprice of property reflected in the valuationsreport.

• The activities of some land NGOs do notassist our processes. They deliberatelypursue an antagonistic agenda and fail tocollaborate with the Commission inaddressing issues related to claims.Information given to claimants by theCommission, in assisting them to arrive at aproperly negotiated settlement, is oftenopposed or distorted by some of theseagents who go to the extent of challengingthe fundamental bases of the RestitutionAct and other laws. This can only sowmistrust, mayhem and chaos in a situationwhere the Commission is trying its best tomediate competing agendas, with a view tofinding the best possible solution in favourof claimants and claimant communities.

• Staff capacity and resources remain a mostimportant challenge. Additional capacityis required to resolve all claims withinstipulated time frames.

• The Regional Land Claims Commission,Gauteng and North-West, is firm in itsdecision to finalise all claims within thestipulated period, if not earlier. It isimportant to note that most claims to beresolved in the coming two years will stillneed extensive post-settlement work.

• Most local municipalities, especially rural

municipalities, do not have the requiredcapacity, expertise and resources toundertake development work. Unless thisproblem is addressed, most settled claimswill remain settled on paper, with noimmediate prospect for development andinfrastructure service provision. TheCommission is keenly aware of this realityand something will be done to address theproblem.

• The provincial Department of Land Affairs,Gauteng and North-West, assists theCommission with the registration ofCommunal Property Associations (CPAs)land-holding entities, the disposal of StateLand and with Extention of Security TenureAct (ESTA)grants for farmworkers.

• T h e D e p a r t m e n t o f A g r i c u l t u r e ,Conservation and Environmental Affairsassists the Commission with land use plans,feasibility studies and farm comparativestudies, among others.

• Eskom assists claimants by providing themwith electricity facilities.

• Local municipalities assist the Commissionwith post-settlement, as they will beresponsible for communities, as well as forbasic infrastructure, after completion of therestitution process.

• The Department of Housing has assisted ouroffice with the allocation of housing grants.

STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS

GAUTENG: CUMULATIVE SETTLED CLAIMS AS AT 31 MARCH 2003

SETTLED RESTITUTION CLAIMSNumber of claims settled 7 373Households involved 7 898Beneficiaries 39 492Land restored: Hectares 3 453

FINANCIAL DETAILSLand Cost R 19,392,497.00Financial Compensation R 240,181,875.00Restitution Discretionary Grant R 1,524,000.00Settlement and Planning Grant R 777,000.00Solatium 0Total award cost R 261,875,372.00

35

NORTH WEST: CUMULATIVE SETTLED CLAIMS AS AT 31 MARCH 2003

SETTLED RESTITUTION CLAIMSNumber of claims settled 1 053Households involved 8 245Beneficiaries 49 474Land restored: Hectares 61 470

FINANCIAL DETAILSLand Cost R 66,132,035.00Financial Compensation R 26,460,522.34Restitution Discretionary Grant R 22,227,000.00Settlement and Planning Grant R 10,576,162.79Solatium 0Total award cost R 125,395,720.13

Gauteng Staff

North West Staff

36

OVERVIEW

CLAIMS HIGHLIGHTS:

During this period, the Regional Land ClaimsCommission (RLCC) of KwaZulu-Natalsettled a number of significant claims in theprovince. The clustering of claims ensured thatmore land than average was restored to itsrightful owners. The past year also saw thesettlement of the thorny Mangethe land claim,which had been preoccupying the Commissionfor years. Not only did the Commission settlethis claim amicably, but it also introduced aviable agri-business, which will have positivespin-offs for the restored community for yearsto come.

The office also accelerated the validation ofo u t s t a n d i n g c l a i m s b y m e a n s o f acommunication campaign and the dedicationof an internal validation unit. Despite thissuccess story, there are a marked number ofclaims whose claimants cannot be trackeddown.

This claim deals with the restoration of landrights to the 150 families in the KwaliniSettlement (a mission), located on the NorthCoast of KwaZulu-Natal. The size of the landclaimed is 1 020 hectares.

The dispossessed community occupied theland from time immemorial. In accordancewith Native Land Act 1913, those families whowere on the farm were prohibited frompurchasing the farm, as it was outside theReserve areas. They were only expected towork on the farm and had the status ofbeneficial occupants.

Between 1963 and 1964, the families wereremoved from the farm, due to pressure fromthe Labour Control Board, which complainedthat the mission was not engaging the familieson its farm as labour tenants. The removal

meant a total change in lifestyle, as the new areahad no ploughing or grazing fields. The S42dsubmission has been completed and the claimwill be settled before June 2003.

The claimant community will be restored to itsoriginal land with a title deed. The land will beused for stock-farming and small-scale farmingor agricultural produce. This will provide theclaimant with some source of income. The farmsare currently producing bananas, sugar cane andcitrus fruit for export. The monetary value of theclaim is approximately R 9 million.

Very little is known about the legacy of the slavetrade, especially the arrival of Zanzibaris, to thepeople of Durban. The Zanzibaris are arguablythe smallest minority group in KwaZulu-Natal.

According to the limited literature on thesubject, the Zanzibaris were freed slaves whowere sent as labourers to the then British colonyof Natal, in the 1870s. About 113 freed slavesfounded the Zanzibari community at the King'sRest on the Bluff. This close-knit communitymaintained its culture, tradition and language,called Makua.

The community was dispossessed of beneficialoccupancy rights after the area was declared aWhite area, in terms of Group Areas Act 69 of1955. The Durban City Council carried out theforced removals in 1961. The community wasremoved to Bayview, Chatsworth. Although thiscommunity is of African origin, it was classifiedas Indian. The claimed area comprises 17,5 ha inthe Bluff (Durban).

According to aerial photography research, therewere about 150 households occupying theclaimed area before the forced removal. Resultsof the claimant verification exercise showed 120Households.

The Zanzibari Community Association (ZCA)has expressed an interest in exploring

Hlaza/Nkwalini

Zanzibari

REGIONAL REPORTRegional ReportKwazulu-Natal

37

opportunities for economic engagement withthe port authorities. The ZCA vision is tocomplement the existing urban fabric aroundthe site and to develop amenities that will notonly benefit the Zanzibari community, but alsothe broader Bluff community. The settlementwill allow for re-integration, where theZanzibari community will live alongside aWhite community.

With its environmental, social and economicaspirations, the development vision is in linewith the eThekwini Integrated DevelopmentPlan.

Further options, including cultural tourism,have been identified as potential income-generating sources. The community's culturaluniqueness is also reflected in the architecturalexpression of the development. Some portionsof the claim can be developed to form a culturaland religious hub with museum facilitiesdisplaying the history of the Zanzibaris. Thevalue of the claim is R 13 557 400 million.

The Ockertskraal area was declared a Whitegroup area, in terms of Group Areas Act 77 of1957, Proclamation 81G, 1960. After thispublication, the claimants were forcefullyremoved between 1965 and 1980. Theclaimants sought their own alternativeaccommodation in the Imbali townships,iSinathing and other areas on the outskirts ofPietermaritzburg.

The rights lost were residential rights, grazingrights and the right of use of large pockets ofland for keeping livestock, as well asgardening.

This group is comprised of individuals wholost registered rights (22 former landowners)and unregistered rights (120 former tenants). Itshould be noted that the numbers are low, incomparison to the number of people removedfrom this area, which is estimated at more thana 1 000. Out of these, 11 claimants eventuallychose the alternative land option, sincerestoration of the same land was not feasible.The size of the alternative land is 124,5609hectares. The Engadini Community Trust wasformed to take ownership of the said farm. The

land was officially transferred to the EngadiniCommunity Trust in December 2002. Themonetary value of the claim is R720 000.

This community claim is for the restitution ofland rights to 250 families of eMpangisweni inVryheid, who lost their land rights from 1950 tothe 1990s. The size of the claimed land is 6 900hectares. The eMpangisweni communityoccupied the land under the indigenous tenuresystem. They enjoyed beneficial occupationalrights to land, as well as grazing rights. They hada certain degree of economic independence, asthey derived their livelihood from the land theylived on and worked on.

The Native Land Act of 1913 prevented the saidcommunity from holding or acquiring any landother than in a scheduled native area. A majorityof the members of the eMpangisweni clan wereclassified as labour tenants. By rights, thefarmers were then entitled to six months ofservice (isithupha) from each householdmember, which could be staggered, at thediscretion of the farmers, to ensure thecontinuous supply of labour. In all instances,expulsion was interpreted as normal in anemployer-employee relationship.

The settlement package currently beingnegotiated will ensure that claimants obtainaccess to land and reap economic benefits fromcommercial forestry and large-scale beeffarming. Landowners have fully committedthemselves to the process. It is envisaged thatthe signing of the S42D submission will befinalised before June 2003. The monetary valueof the claim is R10 million.

This claim is for the restoration of land rights to120 households and 720 beneficiaries, who weredispossessed of their commonage land throughstate expropriation in the 1970s. The size of theclaimed land is 2123,3432 ha and it is situated inKliep River, in the Dannhauser LocalMunicipality, in KwaZulu Natal.

At the time of removal, the claimants had fulltitle ownership and unregistered land rights.The claimants were removed to Madadeni and

Engadini/Ockertskraal

Empangisweni

Waag Alles

38

Osizweni townships and housed inunplastered, four-roomed houses. They did notown the houses and were expected to pay rent.Those with cattle could not bring them to thetownships and had to sell them to “Indian”traders at below market value. Crops weredestroyed and farming implements left behind.

No compensation was paid for loss of incomegained from farming, for the crops destroyed,or the animals and farming implements thatwere left behind or sold. The monetary value ofthe claim is R 4,2 million. The currentlandowners have shown great willingness toreach an amicable solution.

The proposed land use plan incorporatesmulti-use options, such as commercialagriculture, subsistence farming and aresidential area.

A total of 1322 urban claims were settled forDurban, Pinetown and Pietermaritzburgduring this financial year.

• The settlement of rural development claims,in line with socio-economic imperatives ofthe province and the country as a whole

During this period, the RLCC-KZN has forgedstrategic partnerships with a number oforganisations, with the aim of strengthening thesustainability of claims. An intergovernmentalforum is in place, involving the uMgungundlovu,uThukela and Umtshezi municipalities, aimedat aligning restitution claims with theIntegrated Development Plans of thesemunicipalities.

The Commission has also received invaluablesupport from the KZN Sugar Cane Growers'Association, which has seconded one of its staffmembers to the Commission to assist inaccelerating claims involving sugar cane.

During the 2003-2004 financial year, the KZN-RLCC has identified 128 rural community claimsto be settled in a sustainable way and about 2000 urban claims in line with the office strategicplan.

Other Claims Settled

Achievements

Challenges

• The creation of effective linkages withprovincial departments and localgovernment structures for post-settlementsupport

• Active involvement of the Sugar CaneGrowers' Association in accelerating claimsinvolving sugar cane

• A Service Delivery Improvement Plan,which is linked to the strategic milestonesof the office as a whole

• Appointment of a few new staff members

• Stiff opposition to the RestitutionProgramme in certain localities within the

province

• Claimants who cannot be tracked down andwhose claims cannot be processed, as a result

• Lack of archival history pertaining toremovals and dispossession in rural areas

• The development of an effective strategy toensure the viability of land and infrastructuresold to the RLCC as a going concern.

ACHIEVEMENTS AND CHALLENGES

STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS

39

KWAZULU-NATAL: CUMULATIVE SETTLED CLAIMS AS AT 31 MARCH 2003

SETTLED RESTITUTION CLAIMSNumber of claims settled 8 640Households involved 17 485Beneficiaries 87 427Land restored: Hectares 70 603

FINANCIAL DETAILSLand Cost R 69,087,086.36Financial Compensation R 378,105,554.32Restitution Discretionary Grant R 18,474,000.00Settlement and Planning Grant R 4,837,845.72Solatium R 6,155,000.00Total award cost R 476,659,486.40

Kwazulu-Natal Staff

40

OVERVIEW

CLAIM HIGHLIGHTS

In the period under review, the Commissionwas a hive of activity and major strides weretaken in the settlement of land claims and theprovision of post-settlement support tobeneficiaries of land restitution, in order toimprove the fate of poverty strickencommunities.

The Commission managed to settle about 594claims, which benefited 9 670 beneficiaries in 2214 households. More than 21 000 hectares ofland were transferred to claimants, of whichsome 15 836 ha were State land. Theabovementioned statistics were taken fromsuccessfully settled claims at Mavungeni,M u n z h e d z i , X i m a n g i , M a k o t o p o n g ,Manavhela, Sandri and Seedat, Dzwerani andNew Look. This remarkable progress wasachieved, despite the limited capacity in theoffice.

The Commission's pressing need for post-settlement support was ultimately addressedwith the introduction of the Post-SettlementSupport and Development Unit, establishedsolely to assist settled communities with issuesranging from drafting business plans, financialmanagement, property management, training,soliciting assistance from agriculturalcompanies and interdepartmental co-operative governance, among others.

F u r t h e r m o r e , t h e C o m m i s s i o n h a dopportunities to appraise the PortfolioCommittee on Agriculture, Land and WaterAffairs, the Agri-Letaba Union and the Agri-SAAnnual General Meeting regarding theprogress of land claims in Limpopo. Thesebodies appreciate the mammoth task theCommission is undertaking and expressed awillingness to come on board and participatein the restitution process.

There were 241 claimants, who are direct

descendants of individuals who were forcefullyremoved from Tzaneen Location/PuselaLocation, which was a township for Blacks in thedistrict of Tzaneen. Pusela Location residentswere comprised of Sothos, Shangaans andVendas. Shangaans were the first to be removedin 1962 and were resettled at NkowankowaLocation. Their removal was closely followed bythe removal of Sothos to Lenyenye Location in1963. These people were removed by the NativeAdministration Department, in accordance withthe Black Resettlement Act of 1954. The Puselaclaim is about to be finalised and financialcompensation will be presented to the claimantson 14 June 2003.

The claimants lodged a claim in 1995. Theowners of the land, the Dutch Reformed Church,opposed the claim on the farm Bethesda 208 LS.Iscor, which had a prospecting lease on the land,indicated that they wanted to mine the farm anduse its water. Claimants indicated that theywanted to claim the mineral rights to the farm.The claim was referred to the Land Claims Court(LCC), in terms of Rule 5 of the rules coveringthe procedures of the Commission. In June 2001,the parties informed the LCC that they wouldattempt to come to an agreement outside theLCC. The Commission on Restitution of LandRights, Limpopo province, is now in a positionto restore the land to the rightful owners,following an agreement between the parties. Thesettlement of this claim is expected to take placebefore the end of June 2003.

In 1955, the first group of people wasdispossessed to make way for Whites, in termsof Group Areas Act 41 of 1950. Those willing toremain had to be issued with permits. Theclaimant community comprises some 300claimants, who have formed a committee. Theywill, however, form a legal entity by means ofwhich the restored land will be registered.

In 1992, the Baphalane community lodged a land

Pusela claim

Rita Community Claim

Baphalane Claim

REGIONAL REPORTRegional ReportLimpopo

41

claim with the Advisory Commission on LandAllocation (ACLA). When the Commission onRestitution of Land Rights was established,this claim was transferred to the office of theRegional Land Claims Commission (RLCC),Limpopo.

The Baphalane community bought the farmSchilpadnest 385 KQ from the Transvaal LandsCompany through five Kgoro (clan) leaders.The land was then registered in the name ofSaltiel Ramokoka. The tribe continued to ownthe surface rights until the farm wasexpropriated in 1963, in accordance withNative Trust and Land Act 18 of 1936. The tribewas finally removed from the land in August1963.

The matter was disputed and subsequentlyreferred to the Land Claims Court (LCC). TheLand Claims Court has ruled on the matter anda pronouncement of the judgment will be givenon 7 June 2003, when the claim will be settled.

The Commission's primary role is to providetechnical support, seek strategic partners,facilitate training, conduct workshops onfinancial management and monitor andevaluate the performance of projects. Duringthe period under review, the Commissionachieved the following results in theRestitution process.

• The establishment of the LimpopoAgricultural Development CoordinationCommittee (LADCC), which comprisesRLCC Limpopo, the provincial Departmentof Agriculture, the provincial Land ReformOffice, the Land Bank and Trade andInvestment Limpopo

* Who should benefit from land awarded aspart of a settlement and how

* The needs of young versus old in settledclaims

* Capacity-building* The issue of Chiefs and CPA executives* The functionality of CPA executives

RLCC Limpopo has managed to secure keypartners, who are very strategic in its work. Theyare:

Provincial Department of Agriculture.Portfolio Committee on Agriculture, Land andWater AffairsLand BankProgress MillingTrade and Investment LimpopoMunicipalitiesLand-oriented NGOs.

Achievements

Challenges

• The settlement of 594 claims

• The securement of seconded staff from theprovincial Department of Agriculture

• Progress in the Validation Campaign, wheremost files have been researched

• The holding of positive meetings with

farmers who are willing to participate in therestitution process

• Limited staff capacity, based on current andprojected needs

• Limited availability of resources, in terms ofgrants, compared to needs and prioritiesidentified

• Becoming instrumental in the IntegratedDevelopment Program (IDP)

• The identification and involvement of othergovernment departments in the post-settlement phase of claims

• A need to define an exit strategy for post-settlement support on a claim-by-claim basis

• Deciding who should provide continuedsupport and service beyond the existence ofthe Commission, after 2005

• The need to develop a strategy of genderempowerment within settled communities

• Dealing with vast needs identified withinclaimant communities. Decisions should betaken on the following:

ACHIEVEMENTS AND CHALLENGES

STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS

42

LEGAL INTERVENTION

Mamahlola CPA/DG Department of LandAffairs

Reboile Trust/Anglo-Platinum LeaseAgreement

Modimolle Community Land Claim

Mtititi Land Claim

On 6 December 2002, an interim court ordergranted the placement of the affairs of theMamahlola CPA under the administration ofthe Director-General. This was confirmed andfinalised on 7 March 2003.

Transfer of ownership of the farmPalmietfontein 24 KS has taken place. Thetrust has also entered into a 99-year leaseagreement with Anglo-Platinum.

Although the matter was referred to court, theproceedings have been stayed, in view of the factthat the landowners indicated and confirmedthat they are now willing to make theirproperties available for sale.

McRoberts Attorneys refused to make a copy ofa report available, which they alleged to beprivileged and which they were using to disputethe claim lodged by the Mtititi community. Afterbeing served with a notice, in terms of section12(1)(a) of the Restitution Act, however, theymade the report available.

LIMPOPO: SETTLED CLAIMS AS AT 31 MARCH 2003

SETTLED RESTITUTION CLAIMSNumber of claims settled 777Households involved 10 472Beneficiaries 52 360Land restored: Hectares 34 504

FINANCIAL DETAILSLand Cost R 84,506,088.32Financial Compensation R 20,191,157.96Restitution Discretionary Grant R 22,035,000.00Settlement and Planning Grant R 6,470,860.00Solatium 0Total award cost R 133,203,106.28

Limpopo Staff

43

OVERVIEW

CLAIMS HIGHLIGHTS

The Restitution office in Mpumalangaprovince managed to recruit about 60% of thestaff during the course of the year. These staffmembers have shown a strong dedication toimproving the quality of the settlement ofclaims.

Locally and nationally, the media hasdemonstrated a positive attitude towards therestitution process. Some local municipalitiesand the Mpumalanga provincial governmenthave been supportive in adding value to therestitution programme in the province.

From the eighteenth century, the communityof Bakgaga Bakopa Ba-Thabantsho resided onthis farm, which was known as “RammupuduLocation”, or Boleoskop (Maleoskop). Inminutes no. 176, dated 26 January 1910, there isa proposal to the Prime Minister that hisExcellency, the Governor in Council, authoriseand reserve the farm for the purpose of NativeLocation. In terms of Minutes R.5581/1889,permission was granted to the “Kaffir ChiefRamupu” to occupy the farm Rietkloof 509, inthe district of Middelburg.

The Bakgaga Ba Kopa remained on the landuntil 1962, when they were removed toRietkloof, a piece of State land which wasdeclared a Scheduled Area, in terms of theBlack Land Act, 1913 (Act No 27 of 1913). About15 trucks from the government garage weresent to convey 657 famil ies to thecompensatory land. The compensatory land isabout 40 kilometers from Thaba Ntsho.Although Rietkloof was State land, it wasdeclared a Black spot and people had to beremoved to Tafelkop, about 10 kilometersoutside Groblersdal.

The South African Police Services used the

portions owned by the State for trainingpurposes. The SAPS used the top structure,which is used for various activities. There arealso about 1 200 hectares that are highlycontaminated with unexploded ordnance.

Part of the claimed farm, portion 4 {a portion ofportion 3}, comprising 845,0448 hectares, is inprivate hands. The remainder of portion 1,comprising 1662,0546 hectares, is owned by theState (Department of Public Works), as well asthe remainder of portion 3{a portion of portion1}, comprising 2126,6173 hectares, and portion 2,comprising 50,3498 hectares.

The South African Police Services has agreed toappoint a service provider (MECHEM) todecontaminate the portion of land that hasunexploded ordnance The Department ofAgriculture will be the user department ofMaleoskop. The title deed of the portion wherethe top structure is located will remain with thePublic Works Department and the rest of theland will be handed over to the community.

A development plan has been finalised. Someparts of the land are good for agriculturalactivities, game-farming and stock-farming.

A former resident of Tenbosch, the elderly MrJM Siwela, and his son, SK Siwela, lodged a

claim for the former released area 34(18), known as Tenbosch 162 JU, and adjacentland. The three Ngomane chiefs of Hoyi,Siboshwa and Lugedlane and their formerneighbours, Chief George Mkhatswa of theMbambiso of Mkhatswa, submitted aclaim on behalf of their traditional authorities, in1997. Meanwhile, about 120 individuals lodged

claims as family units removed fromTenbosch and adjacent land.

The rights of the claimants were downgradedover time, due to various transactions between1926 and 1953 affecting the properties. The finaldispossession of the communities was executed

Maleoskop .

Tenbosch

community

tribal

individual

REGIONAL REPORTRegional ReportMpumalanga

44

in 1953, when the area under claim was excisedfrom the schedule of released areas, in terms ofthe Native Trust and Land Act, 1936, throughProclamation R84 of 1951. The aim of the saidAct was the advancement of racial segregation.

The Tenbosch Consolidated Land ClaimsCommittee (TCLCC), comprised of electedrepresentatives from the four TraditionalAuthority Areas and members representingclaimants outside these areas, was formed torepresent all the claimants, and the TCLCCwas accepted as the representative claimantbody, in terms of Section 10 of the Act.

The following achievements were attainedduring the 2002/3 financial year.

• Ninety-five per cent completion of thevalidation process

The following are challenges that theCommission is faced with.

Achievements

Challenges

• General publicity to restitution in theprovince

• Communications with claimants about thestatus of their claims

• Positive communication with national MPsand local and district municipalities

• Landowners are posit ive towardsnegotiations with willing sellers and willingbuyers, which can also be attributed to ourM i n i s t e r a n d C h i e f L a n d C l a i m sCommissioner

• Ongoing in-service training for staffmembers

• Conducting the claimant verificationproject and feasibility plans for restitutionprojects successfully

• C o n t i n u o u s s t a f f m o t i v a t i o n a n dfacilitating the fulfilment of their training

needs, in order to achieve best results

• Implementation of case management systems

• Participating meaningfully in policydecisions, for example, to increase grants toclaimants as a poverty alleviation strategy

• More participation in government strategies,such as ISRDP and urban renewalprogrammes

• Establishing service level agreements withother Government departments for post-settlement support

• More communication with claimants, inorder to meet their expectations

• Encouraging claimants to target youth andwomen for capacity-building, in order toexecute their projects successfully

• Ensuring that legal entities for claimants arefully empowered to cope with running theirown affairs

• Establishing and maintaining relationshipswith Non Governmental Organisations( N G O s ) a n d C o m m u n i t y B a s e dOrganisations (CBOs), which are preparedto contribute towards land reform.

• IDT project approval and monitoringimplementation.

• Department of Trade and Industry (DTI)commercial production sector negotiationsthat seek to empower rest i tut ionbeneficiaries to participate in expert andlocal markets. Mentoring programmes forcommercial projects.

• National Development Agency (NDA)partnership in capacity-building and povertyalleviation programmes linked to small-scaleproduction.

• Land Bank information exchange in makingland available for restitution purposes. Otherspheres of co-operation are still beingmapped out.

ACHIEVEMENTS AND CHALLENGES

STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS

45

• District councils, such as Ehlanzeni andGreater Tubatse, and local municipalities,such as Nkomazi , Thaba Chweu,Mbombela, Belfast and Middelburg, someof which have been appointed asimplementation agents for restitutionclaims.

• Amakhosi , which faci l itates goodcommunication with the rest of theclaimant communities.

• Mpumalanga government - more work still

n e e d s t o b e d o n e t o r e a l i s e t h eimplementation of joint restitution projectswith regard to, for example, housing,agriculture and tourism.

• Provincial Land Reform Office(PLRO) jointoperations, where programmes overlap, anda continuous relationship

• Joint operations with other governmentdepartments with regard to HIV and AIDSprogrammes.

MPUMALANGA: CUMULATIVE SETTLED CLAIMS AS AT 31 MARCH 2003

SETTLED RESTITUTION CLAIMSNumber of claims settled 636Households involved 7 642Beneficiaries 39 338Land restored: Hectares 45 946

FINANCIAL DETAILSLand Cost R 20,173,198.00Financial Compensation R 24,674,120.00Restitution Discretionary Grant R 6,012,000.00Settlement and Planning Grant R 2,885,760.00Solatium 0Total award cost R 53,745,078.00

Mpumalanga Staff

46

OVERVIEW

CLAIMS HIGHLIGHTS

ACHIEVEMENTS AND CHALLENGES

During this year, the Western Cape officesettled almost 2000 land claims. This was anincrease from the 2001/2002 financial year. Wehad hoped to achieve even more but this wasnot possible, due to a great deal of pressurebeing experienced from claimants and otherstakeholders, with limited staff.

There is, however, a basis for moving muchfaster, now that all claims have been validated.The staff is motivated and a great deal ofgoodwill towards restitution, as well as co-operation, is being received from the organs ofgovernment, at all levels. We are growing inexperience in dealing with restitution claims.

We want to acknowledge with appreciationthe important role played by the ex-commissioner Mr Alan Roberts who joined theCommission in 1999 and resigned in November2002. A new Commissioner Ms Beverly Jansenhas since been appointed in April 2003.

One of the highlights was the settlement of theProtea Village community claim by awardingfinancial compensation, as a first phase, andrestoring land lost in Kirstenbosch, as a secondphase. This will bring people of colour intotraditionally White upmarket areas, therebyintegrating people across racial and class lines.A number of claimants in areas, such asRetreat, Langebaan and Bonteheuwel, wereawarded alternative State land whererestoration of the original land was notfeasible.

An especially good development was thesettlement of a substantial number of claimswhere the claimants were impoverished, of avery advanced age or ill. These claimants wereall in immediate need of attention. The claimswere accelerated and settled via the StandardSettlement Offer (SSO).

Besides these noteworthy settlements, the officehas seen a significant increase in the number ofclaimants who are opting for alternative landand restoration, as opposed to financialcompensation. This has led to increased concernamong claimants and the Commission regardingland availability, particularly within the Metroarea. To this end, a number of groups andcommunity claimant bodies have vociferouslycampaigned and lobbied to secure the limitedland available within the urban area.

Improved relationships with provincial andlocal authorities, most notably the City of CapeTown, where a Liaison Committee has beenestablished to specifically deal with landrestitution cases, have been welcomed andencouraging. Further intergovernmentalalliances have been forged to implement variousprojects, such as the Protea Village, District Six,Slangrivier and Ndabeni claims, as well as allprojects that fall within the Urban RenewalProgramme and the Integrated RuralDevelopment Strategy.

It is clear that this office has had a number ofvictories, which can be attributed to thecommitment of the staff and the claimants. It isacknowledged, however, that delivery was notas smooth as planned and intended, due to anumber of constraints that the office had to dealwith.

The budget constraints of previous years appearto have been alleviated and the R 1,9 billion thatwas made available, as well as the increasedcapacity for restitution, will ensure that thePresidential target of settling all claims by 2005are met. An important element was thesuccessful Validation Campaign, by means ofwhich all legitimate land claims lodged with theoffice were validated.

Achievements

REGIONAL REPORTRegional ReportWestern Cape

47

STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS

Sound partnerships have been cemented withthe following institutions:

The Department of Provincial and LocalGovernment

The Department of Public WorksThe City of Cape TownThe Municipality of Langebaan/Saldanha BayThe Department of DefenceThe South Peninsula AdministrationThe Valley Christian ChurchThe Paarlberg Dutch Reformed Church

SETTLED RESTITUTION CLAIMSNumber of claims settled 5 363Households involved 8 010Beneficiaries 47 880Land restored: Hectares 5 255

FINANCIAL DETAILSLand Cost R 21,034,974.70Financial Compensation R 167,656,618.81Restitution Discretionary Grant R 15,284,000.00Settlement and Planning Grant R 527,772.00Solatium R 41,000.00Total award cost R204,544,365.51

WESTERN CAPE: SETTLED CLAIMS AS AT 31 MARCH 2003

Western Cape Staff

48

FINANCIAL REPORTFinancial Report

RESTITUTION FINANCIAL REPORT: 2002/2003

0

50,000,000

100,000,000

150,000,000

200,000,000

250,000,000

300,000,000

350,000,000

400,000,000

PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATIVE INVENTORY EQUIPMENT PROFESSIONALAND SPECIAL SERVICES

TRANSFERPAYMENTS

TOTAL

ORIGINAL ALLOCATION ADJUSTED ALLOCATION EXPENDITURE

STATE FUNDING

STANDARD ITEMORIGINAL

ALLOCATIONADJUSTMENT

ADJUSTEDALLOCATION

EXPENDITURE

Transfer Payments* 295,603,000 16,200,000 311,803,000 311,541,883

Professional and Special Services 25,055,000 -12,061,000 12,994,000 12,993,023

Equipment 1,098,000 743,000 1,841,000 1,840,643

Inventory 1,858,000 312,000 2,170,000 2,169,158

Administrative 17,129,000 -1,703,000 15,426,000 15,239,907

Personnel 50,558,000 -1,291,000 49,267,000 48,960,425

TOTAL 391,301,000 2,200,000 393,501,000 392,745,039

It can be deduced from the table above that theamount allocated to the Restitutionprogramme was insufficient as numerousadjustments had to be made to ensure

maximum delivery. Due to the Restitutionprogram successful track record, additionalfunding has been secured for the 2003/04financial year and the ensuing years.

*Transfer payments are for land acquisition, financial compensation and development grants in settlement of the claims.

49

The last financial year has also seen thecompletion of the Claims Validation Campaigna d m i n i s t e r e d b y t h e R e s t i t u t i o nTrust Fund (RTF). The Commissionw a s a l s o a b l e t o s e c u r e a d d i t i o n a l

donor funding to the value of 6 millioneuros for the next phases of the restitutionproject cycle. The financial details of the Trustwith respect to the Claims ValidationCampaign is as follows:

Supporting the Claims Validation Campaign

EXPENDITUREINCOME

BALANCE

DONOR FUNDING

Supporting the Validation Campaign

Income Statement June 2001 - March 2003

Income ExpenditureBTC Grant 13,213,990.00 Expenditure 15,042,413.16DLA Grant 5,000,000.00 Nett Balance 3,187,774.68Interest 16,197.84

TOTAL 18,230,187.84 18,230,187.84

The balance of donor funding shall be used towards data capturing for all validated and settled claimsand this updating our Landbase (database).

PROMOTION

50

In terms of Section 32 of the Promotion ofAccess to Information Act 2 of 2000, anAnnual Report must be submitted to theSouth African Human Rights Commission

by 8 March 2003.Herewith the information submitted asrequested in terms of Section 32 of the AnnualReport:

TRANSVAAL AGRICULTURAL UNIONVERSUS THE MINISTER OF LANDAFFAIRS AND OTHERS

HURENCO BOEREDERY (PTY) LTD ANDOTHERS VERSUS REGIONAL LANDCLAIMS COMMISSIONER: NORTHERNPROVINCE AND ANOTHER

The Transvaal Agricultural Union (TAU)challenged the Section 42(D) agreement(Restitution of Land Rights Act 22 of 1994).Whilst the case was ongoing in the LandClaims Court, TAU withdrew the case fromthe Land Claims Court.

The Court found that, since the relief soughtwas contrary to the law on declatory orders asapplied in the High Courts, and no case wasmade for a deviation from these requirements,it was appropriate to make a costs order. TheCourt rejected the application with costs.TAU therefore had to pay the legal costsbecause the case was withdrawn from theLand Claims Court.

An application for information with regard to aland claim to be made available was lodged interms of the Promotion of Access to InformationAct 2 of 2000, but the application waswithdrawn.

The Court found that, despite the practice in theCourt of not awarding costs in social interestlitigation, the Court still has a wide discretionwith regard to costs. The application had beenill founded and would therefore not havesucceeded. For this reason, costs should followthe outcome. The Court ordered that theapplicants pay costs as between party and party.

Promotion of Access to Information Act 2 of 2000Report

INFORMATION NUMBERThe number of requests received 17The number of requests granted in full 9The number of requests granted in terms of S46 2

The number of requests refused partially 3Requests still in process 3

JUDGES OF THE LAND CLAIMS COURT

Fikile Bam

Antonie Gildenhuys

Yasmin Meer

Justice Moloto

President:

Other Judges:

CONTACT DETAILSOF LAND CLAIMS COURT

Address:Trust Bank Centre, Randburg Mall

c/o Hill Street & Kent AvenueRandburg, 2194

Private Bag X10060Randburg, 2125

Tel: 011 781 2291Fax: 011 781 2217/8

51

CLAIMS SETTLEDthrough the Land Claims CourtClaims Settled

Majeng

Randall and another versus the Minister ofLand Affairs

Hafsa Cachalia versus the Minister of LandAffairs

Moodley N O

Ndebele Ndzundza Community Concerningthe Farm Kafferskraal No 181 Js

Minister Of Defence And Another VersusThe Khosis Community At Lohatla AndOthers

In the early 1880s, the community established asettlement on the land known as Majeng,located in the Barkly West District. Thenumber of households living there before forcedremovals took place, is estimated at 2 000.

The forced removal of the community tookplace in 1975. Although the Majeng communitydid not have ownership of the land, they had theright to occupy the land and it was, therefore,accepted that their claim fell within the scope ofthe Restitution of Land Rights Act, 1994 (Act22 of 1994) as amended. In 1994, negotiationswere entered into between the Department ofLand Affairs, the present landowners and theclaimant community.

The Land Claims Court issued an order infavour of the claimants on the 6 April 2002.The 10 685,2367 hectares of land restored will beused for the establishment of a mining andagricultural development.

The claimants were dispossessed of their rightin land in 1980. This case involved two families,namely the Randall and the Knott families.

The Court found that the sale transactionsentered into were not between a willing sellerand a willing buyer, and were indeed forcedsales. Although an agreement was reached outof Court, the Court made an order that theclaimants were dispossessed of their rights inland. Both families received financialcompensation. The Knott family received R1,500,000-00 and the Randall family received R4,725,184-00.

The claimants were forced to sell 11 propertiesbelow market value and were thus dispossessed

of their right in land.

The matter was finalised after the parties wereable to reach an agreement out of the Court,which was subsequently made an order of theCourt. In terms of the Court order, an amountof R1,200,00-00 was paid to the claimants in fullas final settlement to their claim.

An interim application was lodged for thedeceased claimant to be substituted as arepresentative of a deceased estate. Theapplication was granted.

The claimants were dispossessed of their rightin land. The Court found that the claim wasproperly lodged. The Court made an order and6 beneficiaries received financial compensationof R64, 804-28.

The first part of this case has been settled andhas benefited 400 beneficiaries and 2321,3459hectares.

The validity of the claim was contested andwith regard to the removal of the community aspart of the homeland policy, which was not justan equitable compensated. The Court foundthat the claim is valid.

The matter was taken to the Land Claims Courtto request that the subject land be restored. Thesubject land is situated on a battlefield andclaimants would be endangered if the subjectland were restored to them. The Court foundthat it is in public interest that the land on

th

RESTITUTION CASES IN PROCESS ATTHE LAND CLAIMS COURT

52

which the Battle School is situated is notrestored to any claimants.

The claimants then appealed against the orderof the Court, which was granted. The Judgefound that, since there were various points ofdifference between the majority and theminority judgment, there was a possibility thatanother Court would find differently. Thismatter is still in process.

An interim application was lodged for thedeceased claimant to be substituted as arepresentative of a deceased estate. Theapplication was granted.

The Court found that, as a sole heir, theclaimant may be substituted in his capacity asexecutor of the estate, and the particulars of theclaim amended appropriately. The Courtfurther found that the claim was properlylodged.

The claimants took their claim to the LandClaims Court. The Court dismissed the claimon the grounds that the Claimants could referthe claim to the Office of the Regional LandClaims Commission.

The Court found that, since the right to claimland is protected in the Bill of Rights, and such aright must therefore be interpreted generously,it is possible that another Court might come to adifferent conclusion.

Leave to appeal was granted by the Land ClaimsCourt. The matter is still in process.

The claimants has lost their right in land andmineral rights and therefore took the matter toCourt by way of the direct access procedure asprescribed in the Restitution of Land RightsAct 22 0f 1994.

The Supreme Court of Appeal found andordered that the Richtersveld community is

entitled to restitution of the subject land andthe mineral rights.

The parties had however agreed that the otherissues arising from the Restitution of LandRights Act 22 of 1994, such as whether theclaimants received just and equitablecompensation at the time of dispossession andthe form of restitution that claimants wereentitled to, would stand over for lateradjudication by the Land Claims Court.

The original claimant died before the claim wassettled. The Court made an order thatrestoration be granted since the claimant didnot receive just and equitable compensation atthe time of dispossession. The Court furtherordered that the original deceased claimant besubstituted by his sons in law.

The Court ordered that the property be restoredto the claimants. The Court ordered theclaimants to pay back the sum of money thatMr. Mahatey had received when he sold theproperty to the Community DevelopmentBoard. This matter has now been referred to theSupreme Court of Appeal

1. Miles D Lappeman & Others v Andrew MMphela & Others

2. Frederick Pretoruis v Mosita CPA & Others

3. Chabane Jackson Hlaneki & Others v CRLRand others

4. Modimolle Community Land Claim.

5. Guilford Ltd (Sidney On Vaal) v Ramakarane

6. Motale Arthur Pule

7. Mothusi N. Tlhabanyane

8. The Bakone v RLCC Mpumalanga

9. Richard Mogomotsi v Government of RSA

Singh No:

Mahlangu versus the Minister of Land Affairsand others

The Richtersveld Community versus theAlexkor Limited and another

Allie N O and another versus the Departmentof Land Affairs and others

CASES REFERRED TO THE LANDCLAIMS COURT

53