Land Acquisition in the Republic of South Sudan with Reference to Investment
By Jacob K. Lupai, SOUTH SUDAN AUG. 29/2011, SSN; The land Act, 2009 is clear on the acquisition of Community Land in the Republic South Sudan. Entrepreneurs who are interested in investing in South Sudan and who may need land should be better advised to consult the Land Act, 2009. This is in order to avoid a headache and bitter disappointment in the way of what was about to happen in Mukaya Payam in Lainya County, Central Equatoria State. Article 27(1) of the Land Act stipulates that, “Subject to consensus between members of the Community, Traditional Authority may recommend the grant to a person or company, whether national or foreign, a right of leasehold in respect of a portion of community land to the appropriate land administration.” On the size of land to be granted, Sub-Article 2 stipulates that, “A land size of not more than 250 feddans shall be granted by the Traditional Authority in consultation with the County Land Authority and the Payam Land Council.” However, when the land size to be granted exceeds 250 feddans, Sub-Article 3 stipulates that, “Without prejudice to the rights of the community to land, the Concerned Ministry in the State shall in consultation with the Investment Authority approve the lease contract granted by the Traditional Authority if the leasehold contract is for more than 250 feddans”. In Mukaya Payam a lease agreement was signed between Mukaya Payam Cooperative and Nile Trading & Development, a Delaware Corporation of the USA. The lease agreement was for a land size of 600,000 hectares and the lease was for 49 years. As no proper procedure was followed the lease agreement collapsed as the community mobilized against the agreement through their Member of the Central Equatoria State Legislative Assembly. The lesson learned from the Mukaya Payam experience is that land is very precious to the community and it pays to follow the law of the land or the laid down procedure. I became aware of the land issue in Mukaya Payam in 2008. As the Director General for Agricultural Extension and food security advisor in the then Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, Animal Resources and Fisheries in Central Equatoria State, I was given an assignment to investigate about a lease agreement on land in Mukaya Payam. My terms of reference were to establish that the objective of the project was in conformity with government policies, to establish that public interest and social community benefits were safeguarded and to find out the response of the community regarding the acceptance of the project. In the investigation I observed that after the lease agreement was signed, about six months earlier the investors and Mukaya Payam Cooperative were still to consult with the Commissioner of Lainya County which includes Mukaya Payam and also still to meet with Mukaya Payam authorities. It would have been appropriate for consultations to have taken place before the lease agreement was signed. On the first term of reference the objective of the project to some extent confirmed with the overall government policies regarding forestry development. However, what was worrying was the unlimited access of the project to harvesting current tree growth. Also, the project’s emphasis on biofuel was not in line with the government’s policy of focusing on food security where the emphasis was on crop production. On the second term of reference the project did not spell out clearly quantifiable objectives for the benefit of the community. It was therefore not specifically clear as to what extent the public interest and social benefits to the local community could have been safeguarded. The profit sharing was between the Company and Mukaya Payam Cooperative whose list of members was not made available. It couldn’t have been that the membership of Mukaya Payam Cooperative was the entire community sharing the profits from the project. By the end of the lease agreement any profits generated by the Company in respect of the Leased Land, the Company would have received on average 55 per cent of the profits and the Cooperative 45 per cent. In the project the public interest was simply mentioned in general terms, for example, such as, “the Company will use its commercially reasonable best efforts to enhance the lifestyles of the communities within or adjacent to the Leased Land in which it conducts its activities.” This general statement was not considered good enough. What was expected to enhance people’s lifestyles should have been spelt out clearly and itemized. Public interests were met through the provision of services such as education, health, roads, food security, clean drinking water, recreation facilities and benefits to the disadvantaged in the community. One the third term of reference the response on the project from a small sample of community members of Mukaya Payam was informative and interesting. The Administrator of Mukaya Payam said he did not know of any Mukaya Payam Cooperative and the Lease Agreement. One prominent community member said no one informed him of the leasing of Mukaya Payam land to investors. Three other community members said they did not know about the Lease Land and added there would be trouble if the Lease Agreement between Mukaya Payam Cooperative and Nile Trading & Development, was implemented without wider consultations with Mukaya Payam communities of the bomas (villages). All the respondents claimed that what was said of Mukaya Payam Cooperative was nothing other than the only members who signed the Lease Agreement. They demanded the list of the Mukaya Payam Cooperative members to be produced if there was transparency. The respondents who sounded confident said there was none. >From the investigation the main finding was that there was a controversy surrounding the Lease Agreement between Mukaya Payam Cooperative and Nile Trading & Development for land in Mukaya Payam. The area of 600,000 hectares was already larger by far in size than the area of Mukaya Payam. According to the Statistical Yearbook for South Sudan 2010, on average the area of Mukaya Payam is about 68,930 hectares leave alone extending it to 1,000,000 hectares. Granting the Company without any limitation to explore, develop, mine, produce and/or exploit petroleum, natural resources and any other minerals that might include uranium without adequate mechanism in place to monitor the work of the Company was already controversial. On the basis of my investigation I recommended that an independent fact finding committee should have been formed and sent to Mukaya Payam to determine the legitimacy of the Lease Agreement. The opinions of the cross-section of the community should have been sought about the Lease Agreement for an informed decision. The membership of Mukaya Payam Cooperative should have been determined for transparency and how individual members in particular and the community at large could have benefited from the Lease Agreement. The fact finding committee should have recommended the way forward in the best interest of the community in Mukaya Payam in particular and in Lainya County in general. Interestingly three years later the issue of the Lease Agreement for Mukaya Payam land was still a hot issue. It seems my recommendations were not acted upon any sooner for unknown reasons. In conclusion, according to the Pioneer Weekly Newspaper, Issue 15 Vol 002 of 15-21 August 2011, the Mukaya community has finally put the issue of the Lease Agreement to rest. I was delighted that the findings of my investigation were confirmed and my recommendations for further investigation were most probably carried out resulting to the cancellation of the Lease Agreement. There will always be people who do not care but only have an eye on excessive gain at the expense of their community. People only need to be vigilant and proactive in community affairs for the benefit of all in promoting development, harmony and unity. The author can be reached at [email protected] COMMENTS, PLEASE CLICK HERE Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of th -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "JFD info" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jfdinfo?hl=en.
