[Ter]

White Zimbabwe farmers in South Africa compensation bid

A group of white farmers who had their land seized in Zimbabwe are attempting to claim property owned by the Zimbabwean government in South Africa.

The farmers want the four properties in Cape Town, worth millions of dollars, as compensation for the loss of farms.

Last week, a South African court agreed with a regional court ruling that President Robert Mugabe's violent land reform programme was unlawful.

Almost all white-owned land has been seized in the past 10 years.

The ruling by the South African High Court paved the way for farmers who lost property to file for compensation in South African courts.

The farmers' lawyer in Cape Town, Willie Spies, said that since the properties were of a non-diplomatic nature they were not protected by diplomatic immunity.

Jets vulnerable

A sheriff of the court is due to serve the papers to the people currently occupying the properties.

If the farmers are successful their lawyers will have legal control over the properties and they can put them up for auction.

The BBC's Mohammed Allie in Cape Town says other non-diplomatic assets such as Air Zimbabwe jets are also vulnerable to be seized for compensation for lost farms.

In 2008, the Southern African Development Community (Sadc) court ruled that farmers should be allowed to return to their farms unhindered.

Earlier this year, a Zimbabwe court rejected the farmers' attempt to enforce the Sadc tribunal's decision.

And despite the formation of a unity government in Zimbabwe a year ago, white farmers are still facing harassment.

Land reform is one of President Mugabe's central policies but his critics say it has helped destroy the country's economy.

Under colonial rule, white farmers seized much of Zimbabwe's best land, forcing black farmers to less fertile areas.

Reversing this was one of the reasons for Zimbabweans taking up arms in the 1970s to end white minority rule.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8594479.stm


The Japies cannot go home as yet but they sure will get compensation.

The dictator Mugabe will be humiliated.

There was a somewhat similar case decades ago, when some teachers who worked in Zaire never got paid. They went through the courts in Europe and succeeded to have a plane seized in Brussels. Ha ha, they finally got paid.

Justice.


Ter

[Kapanda]

Get the fuck outa here!

That is ridiculous.

Justice.

Justice??

[Ter]

That is ridiculous.

Wut ?

Are you a Mugabe supporter or something ?



Ter

[Kapanda]

White people trying to get compensation from getting kicked out of African land...

Has nothing to do with what I think about Mugabe.

[Ter]

Euh, Kapanda, many of those white people have never been to Europe, they are Africans by birth and citizenship. I personally know some of them.

They have been targeted for eviction solely on the basis of colour of their skin and in my book that is called racism.

Even so, after all is said and done, they have been thrown of their lands without any compensation.

And read the OP; why would the courts in South Africa and the SADC also rule in their favour ? It is you who re misled in this.


Ter

[Kapanda]

The courts would uphold the law because that is what they are there to do, and that is the current law. But that does not mean that this wouldn't be extremely unfair and unjust.

This is the usual classic case, showing the ridiculous notion that inheritance only regards itself with assets and riches, not with obligations or liabilities.

The reason why they are there in the first place, as the OP also reports in fact, is because their ancestors, or someone white, ie from their ancestral geographic location, kicked the natives out of the land a while back. Now we should accept that the land has belonged to them all along??

[Ter]

But that does not mean that this wouldn't be extremely unfair and unjust.

Fine, but those farmers also feel unfairly treated.

Most if not all of the seized farms have been given to Mugabe's new wife and friends and political associates and sycophants.
Was that better in your view of things ?

Zimbabwe was the country of plenty and it is now worse than a banana republic.

I used to go shopping in Harare ! Ha ha ha.
It was the country of plenty, a country with a future.
And it became a train wreck under dictator mad man Mugabe.

It illustrates much of what is wrong in Africa. A long line of crazy corrupted motherfuckers dictators: Idi Amin dada, Mobutu Sese Seko, Bokassa, Mugabe, and so on and so forth.


Ter

[Kapanda]

I can agree with you there, but white people crying foul??

[Otebo]

Kapanda what you basically are saying is white Africans can't be victims of injustice purely because of the colour of their skin? Thats absurd. Whatever the historic wrongs of colonialism - murders, assualts, thefts, intimidation and violent evictions without compensation are not an acceptable programme of land reform. Your assertion it is all "African land" which can't belong to people with white skin is racism pure and simple. If I were to reverese it and say European land cannot belong to blacks and they should be sent packing it would be completely unacceptable, and quite rightly. What you seem to be saying is no different.

I'd consider land ownership in Africa an economic injustice that needs tackling. You see as a racial issue and in justifying the violent farm seizures you defend what has been not only an illegal and undemocratic land grab done purely for the benefit of Mugabe and his cronies but also an absolute disaster that has brough Zimbabwe to its knees.

[Kapanda]

If I were to reverese it and say European land cannot belong to blacks and they should be sent packing it would be completely unacceptable, and quite rightly.

That's because black people didn't steal European land. Pure and simple. I say nothing about white people fairly buying land from natives, and if they can prove that this is the case, then I will admit to being wrong. The burden of proof in Africa is on the white people though.

In fact, it's quite cynical and offensive that you compare this to black people owning land in Europe. The injustice is flagrant, and even the article in the OP points it out.

[Aekos]

Get the fuck outa here!

And African migrants gtfo Europe? Fair is fair.

[politburo player]

The reason why they are there in the first place, as the OP also reports in fact, is because their ancestors, or someone white, ie from their ancestral geographic location, kicked the natives out of the land a while back. Now we should accept that the land has belonged to them all along??

Unless the bushmen who were there before the Boers, English, and central African migrants can be found/located, the land should belong to the industrious white farmers. The failure rate of black farms in neighboring South Africa, in spite of getting the land for free and having preferential government treatment, is around 90%. So if other African republics want to copy this failure model, they should go ahead and do it, even though it will only lead to more 'African' problems. In the absence of a white workforce in southern Africa, famine, drought, overpopulation, and deforestation will reverse demographic trends and depopulate southern Africa.

[Kaspar]

Unless the bushmen who were there before the Boers, English, and central African migrants can be found/located, the land should belong to the industrious white farmers.

Your logic doesn't make sense. You say you want the land to be given back to the bushmen, yet you say Europeans have a greater right to the land than Zimbabweans with Bantu heritage. Bantu peoples were in Zimbabwe before Europeans, so using your logic you should support Mugabe's land reform.

[Political Interest]

The European Zimbabweans are still citizens of Zimbabwe and should be treated as such. While it is questionable that the land on which they live is rightfully theirs by inheritance, due to such land being largely stolen, they should still be treated as any other citizen after justice has been done.

[politburo player]

Kaspar wrote:
Your logic doesn't make sense. You say you want the land to be given back to the bushmen, yet you say Europeans have a greater right to the land than Zimbabweans with Bantu heritage. Bantu peoples were in Zimbabwe before Europeans, so using your logic you should support Mugabe's land reform.

Given the starvation and famine in Zimbabwe, I think the land should go to the people, groups, and entities who have a known track record of successful food production (white farmers), not to those who have a track record of ruining farm land after inheriting it for political reasons. If you disagree with this logic, then I guess you will enjoy the increased starvation and larger stacks of bodies that will no doubt ensue if your dreams of Mugabe mandated social justice come true.

[Kaspar]

Yes, and we all know how bushmen have a great track record for being farmers.

Again, your original argument is illogical.

[politburo player]

The bushmen are either extinct or so few in number that giving the land back to them would be a waste. Even your most die hard liberal will agree with me here. So that leaves two other groups, black migrants from equitorial Aftica and white migrants from Europe. Pick your poison: let the blacks have the land and have more starvation or leave it in white ownership and have less starvation. I bet most liberals would sacrifice a few million here and there in order to achieve their vision of social justice...

Again, like I said...

Given the starvation and famine in Zimbabwe, I think the land should go to the people, groups, and entities who have a known track record of successful food production (white farmers)

Patterns of Bantu migration since the 1600's... notice how its all southward . To mooch off the white man no doubt. Now they have him under their boot heel.

[Kapanda]

Lololol

"To mooch off the white man, no doubt"

Strong, conclusive logic, not an opening to refute.

[sans-culotte]

Pick your poison: let the blacks have the land and have more starvation or leave it in white ownership and have less starvation.

Evidence of correlation between ownership stats and malnutrition stats plz

Strong, conclusive logic, not an opening to refute.

defo

[Kaspar]

Patterns of Bantu migration since the 1600's... notice how its all southward . To mooch off the white man no doubt. Now they have him under their boot heel.

Mate, we've had this discussion before. Bantu migrations were primarily occurring before the 1600s.

Secondly, there where no white people to "mooch" off of in Zimbabwe in the 1600s, all white people were located at the extreme tip of South Africa. The Boers hadn't even started their great trek yet. In fact, Boers didn't even exist yet.

Putting politics aside, practically everything you say is just untrue, objectively untrue. Unless you enjoy being wrong, I suggest you try to fix this problem.