This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 HARARE 001635 
 
SIPDIS 
 
LONDON FOR GURNEY 
PARIS FOR NEARY 
NSC FOR SENIOR AFRICA DIRECTOR JENDAYI FRAZER 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: EAGR ECON PGOV ZI
SUBJECT: COMMERCIAL FARMERS CHARGED WITH CRIME OF FARMING 
 
 
¶1. Summary:  On July 4-5, 15 Chiredzi-area commercial sugar 
farmers were charged with violating section 8 of the Land 
Acquisition Act by continuing to farm past the 
government-mandated deadline for ceasing commercial farming 
activity.  As of May 10, 2002 all farmers who fail to stop 
occupying, holding, or using land 45 days after the original 
section 8 notification were subject to criminal penalities. 
This legislation is retroactive to all previous section 8 
acquisition orders, thereby making any occupation or use of 
land after June 24 a criminal offense.  The farmers were 
charged with obstructing the government,s land resettlement 
program even though they had adhered to the government,s 
guidelines regarding farm-size ,and had formally applied for 
an extension of their section 8 orders in advance of the 
deadline.  It is unclear why these 15 were singled out for 
prosecution because all of the 52 small-scale commercial 
farmers in Chiredzi have followed the same process to both 
avoid contravening  the Land Acquisition Act, and to continue 
to pursue their livelihoods.     End summary. 
 
¶2. On July 9, Poloff and Econoff met with David Hasluck, 
Director of the Commercial Farmers Union (CFU) to discuss the 
charges brought against the fifteen independent sugar cane 
farmers on July 4 and 5 for continuing to tend to their crops 
subsequent to the June 24 deadline.  Hasluck believes that 
someone resettled under the fast track program probably 
raised the complaint against the farmers,thereby staking a 
claim on the cane growing on the farms.  Hasluck's feeling 
was that this -- the first such filing of official charges 
under the Land Acqusition Act --  was a test case, and that 
if the farmers lost, this would signal even more chaos at a 
time when few crops are being grown and widespread famine is 
looming. 
 
¶3. The farmers were charged with violating the government's 
resettlement program even though their farms are within the 
maximum farm size regulations promulgated by Minister of 
Lands Joseph Made.  Although the regulation has not been 
formally enshrined within the Land Act, the 15 farmers were 
under the impression that as long as they complied with this 
guideline they would be allowed to retain their holdings and 
continue to farm.  The fact that the farmers have been 
charged anyway makes it increasingly unclear how commercial 
farmers can legally retain any portion of their holdings. The 
Lands, Agriculture and Rural Resettlement Ministry has 
announced a bevy of (sometimes contradictory) guidelines 
relating to the resettlement program, and the situation on 
the ground varies significantly from area to area.  Hasluck 
commented that, often, the amount of land each farmer is 
allowed to retain depends on the individual proclivities of, 
as well as the farmer's relationship with, the local land 
committees.   The disconnect between the messages emanating 
from Harare and the situation on the ground leaves commercial 
farmers in the untenable situation of not knowing which 
regulations to comply with to avoid contravening the Land 
Act.  Essentially, the lack of transparency within the 
resettlement process means that even if these commercial 
farmers adhere to the most recent "rules" of the land reform 
program they have very little legal recourse because the GOZ 
continually moves the goalposts. 
 
 
¶4. Hasluck noted that all 52 of the small scale sugarcane 
growers in  Chiredzi submitted formal requests for extension 
of their section 8 acquisition orders to Minister Made 
because they still had crops in the ground that needed to be 
harvested.  It is therefore unclear why the 15 farmers were 
selected for prosecution,and not any of the other 37 
independent cane growers.  This is only the latest example of 
widespread arbitrariness in the implementation of the GOZ's 
resettlement program. 
¶5. Hasluck told the story of a Chegutu commercial farmer who 
applied to Minister Made,s office for an extension of his 
section 8 orders.  The farmer copied his request to the local 
land committee and then approached this body to follow-up. 
Although the local committee informed the farmer that he was 
free to continue his operations, halfway into the growing 
season, he received a letter on behalf of Minister Made 
informing him that there were to be absolutely no extensions 
of section 8 orders, and that the local land committees did 
not have the authority to grant waivers.  In many ways the 
Chegutu farmer,s predicament is analogous to the situation 
faced by the 15 Chiredzi commercial farmers and, indeed, 
commercial farmers throughout the country. 
 
Comment 
--------- 
 
¶6. We agree with Hasluck's assesment that this will be an 
important test case of the GOZ's land reform program.  A 
successful prosecution will embolden the GOZ to pursue 
charges against all commercial farmers who have not stopped 
farming, and will discourage any remaining commercial farmers 
from continuing their operations.  This will exacerbate the 
already dramatic food shortage, as newly resettled farmers 
won't come close to filling the gap left by the commercial 
producers.  The Chegutu example suggests that Minister Made 
is uninterested in compromise, despite the fact that half the 
population will soon require food assistance.  August 9 now 
looms as a crucial date, as that is the GOZ's deadline for 
all commercial farmers to be off properties that have been 
listed. 
SULLIVAN