HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept
{
"id": 119100,
"url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/119100/?format=api",
"text_counter": 441,
"type": "other",
"speaker_name": "",
"speaker_title": "",
"speaker": null,
"content": "you look at the time lines. So, I recommend that we read this document as a basis of informing the constitution-making process. There is the issue of compulsory acquisition. Again, that is not addressed as relates to land but generally, as relates to the issue of property. To some extent, the Land Acquisition Act was actually in existence before the Constitution. So, it in many ways informed the constitution-making process. But it was made before we had the Bill of Rights. So, to that extent, having been a statute that came in before the Constitution, it has got its own shortfalls. If you look at issues that relate to compulsory acquisition that are found in Section 75 of the Constitution, again, they do not deal with land as a unique resource, but it is lumped together with all the other properties. The Land Policy is telling us, in order to agree with the power of the State, to take over land compulsorily for public purposes, we need not only to look at the Constitution again, but in the implementing legislation, we must give protection and have a balance between public interest and private rights. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, one of the things that we are proposing in the land policy that is radical is that in relation to private land that is compulsorily acquired, if the Government takes land from you through compulsory acquisition, that will be the end of the matter. But, normally, the Government acquires land under a compulsory acquisition for a purpose; and this land policy says that if the purpose for which your land was acquired compulsorily by the Government is extinguished or is not realised, then the original owner of the land or his successors have the pre-emptive right over that land so that, that land then is not made available for allocation again to private individuals. So that you know that the land that you gave away or was taken away from you, you will always have a residual interest on it. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, there are issues to do with development control and other regulatory matters which, for the purposes of now, I would urge hon. Members to read through but they are not saying anything new other than emphasizing the need that development control is important, both in urban and rural areas on land, or any environment based or otherwise. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, there are issues of land tenure from Page 15 of this Sessional Paper. Under this policy, we are going to categorize land in three categories. At the moment, we have what is called Government land, trust land and private land. Under this policy, we are going to have three categories, but the name of one will change and that is in relation to what we now call trust land. Trust land will now be called âcommunity landâ. We are saying that community land should be land that is managed and used by a particular community. If you look at the glossary of this land policy, the community is not necessarily an ethnic group. So, those who are expressing fear that by referring to âcommunityâ, that we mean, necessarily the ethnic community which is dominant in a particular area; the term âcommunityâ means those who were ordinarily the residents in that area. We think that, in managing community land, the people of that community should have some say. It should not be a matter that is left to the Central Government and for that matter, the various organs in the Central Government. The policy requires a repeal of the Trust Land Act and replacing it with the Land Act. Under that Land Act, as stated in Page 17 of the policy, the ownership will be vested in that particular community. A legal framework has to be worked out to make sure that, that particular policy objective is met. That is to ensure that we do not disregard the rights"
}