Committee: AR’s foreign land bill hurts investment, violates Constitution

The parliamentary standing committee on natural resources has raised red flags over the Affirmative Repositioning (AR) bill on foreign land ownership, saying it is unconstitutional and will affect Namibia’s investor friendliness.

The committee has had public hearings with the government, civil society organisations, farmers union and traditional authorities to compile its report on the bill tabled in the National Assembly last week.

The bill calls for the regulation of land ownership by foreigners and the urgent passing of legislation in this regard.

AR is also calling for the regulation of the right to acquire property by non-Namibian citizens.

The committee deduced from their hearings with stakeholders that the bill may “detrimentally” affect the international perception of Namibia.

“It may detrimentally affect Namibia’s standing as a respected member in the eyes of the international community.

Its effects will wave a red flag for much needed foreign investments in the country and result in a substantial drop in the gross domestic product, employment opportunities for Namibians and diminish the welfare of the people,” the report says.

In addition, the committee says the 51% local ownership proposal in the bill means investors and foreigners will carry 100% of the risk and zero control.

“The bill does not promote investments in Namibia. It renders the country uncompetitive, reduces the ease of doing business and increases the cost of doing business,” the report states.

FAIL CONSTITUTIONAL TEST

The committee says the bill is contrary to articles 10, 16 and 21 of the Constitution.

“The proposed bill will have an impact on certain rights and freedoms,” the report reads.

The committee says the bill infringes on the ability of parties to bargain and create the terms of their agreement.

“It will also have an impact on the freedom of contract, which is the right of persons to freely contract and bind themselves in respect of all legitimate subject matters, in that it prohibits with whom persons may enter into contracts for the sale of land and land rights,” the report reads.
NO POLITICAL WILL

AR spokesperson George Kambala on Monday said unlike South Africa that passed the Expropriation Act, Namibia lacks the political will to redress history.

“The difference between South Africa and Namibia is political will. While South Africa has passed the Expropriation Act, its implementation remains a test of whether the African National Congress has the courage to stand against landowners and capitalist forces,” he said.

Kambala said in Namibia, however, the ruling elite lacks even the pretence of radical reform.

“Parliament is more concerned with pleasing foreign investors than responding to the demands of the people who signed our petition,” he added.

The committee’s findings expose the ongoing land injustice that has plagued Namibia since independence.

“AR has always maintained that land reform in Namibia has been hijacked by elite interests while the masses remain landless,” Kambala said.

He maintains that the recommendations are a mere bandage on a bullet wound.

“The real issue at hand is that land remains concentrated in the hands of a few, and the so-called reforms being discussed do nothing to dismantle this economic apartheid,” the spokesperson said.

He argued that the findings fall short of addressing the historic theft of land, the illegitimate ownership of vast tracts by a privileged few, and the urgent need for radical redistributive justice.