![]() Date: 2025-08-20 Page is: DBtxt003.php txt00005983 | |||||||||
Country ... Burundi | |||||||||
Burgess COMMENTARY | |||||||||
Burundi's land conundrum
BUJUMBURA, 14 November 2013 (IRIN) - Burundi is preparing to receive thousands of its refugees from Uganda in a voluntary repatriation exercise. Their return will follow that of around 30,000 compatriots expelled by Tanzania earlier in 2013, and that of a similar number obliged to return in late 2012 after they lost their refugee status.
Over the past decade or so, around half a million people have returned to Burundi, a country that saw two large-scale exoduses in the late 20th century: Tens of thousands fled in the wake of a genocide in 1972, while many more left during a civil war that raged between 1993-2005.
One of the major obstacles to the successful reintegration of the returnees – who number 13,000 in the case of Uganda – relates to land. Many of those now in Uganda own no land in Burundi, because they left the country when they were very young. And those that did own property, do not know if they will get it back.
How land recovery works - in theory
The land commission (Commission National Terres et Autres Biens - CNTB), formed in 2006, is in charge of resettling returnees and tackling land grievances and disputes. Its 50 members, appointed by presidential decree, are 60 percent Hutu and 40 percent Tutsi as required by the 2000 Arusha Accord.
Those looking to recover their land file a case with CNTB's provincial offices whose officials then conduct field visits and hearings before making a decision, explained Serapion Bambonanire, CNTB's chair.
'At the level of the province, they help people to reach an agreement. They are not judges, they are mediators,' Bambonanire told IRIN, adding that the decision arrived at here is imposed by the provincial team but not enforced to allow for appeals by aggrieved parties at the CNTB's national offices.
At the national level, the appeal is tackled by an ad hoc committee and the decision arrived at must be implemented by the provincial delegation. However, the decision can still be appealed against in court.
To date, CNTB has handled some 38,000 land complaints, said Bambonanire. The cases mainly relate to the 1972 caseload of returnees.
'You cannot solve the problem of a landless person by making another person landless' But CNTB's handling of some of the cases has been criticized.
A complicated situation
'The restitution of land and other properties to the victims of the 1972 war is getting complicated. At the time, many Hutus left the country and their land was given to the Tutsi with official land titles. The question now is, should the commission just restore the land to its original owners 40 years later, leaving present occupants without land?' asked Pacifique Nininahazwe, a political analyst and civil society leader.
'The commission's problem is that the returning Hutus are getting back their land without restitution to those who got the land legally. Those who got the land legally from the government should be compensated. You cannot solve the problem of a landless person by making another person landless.'
Burundian law protects the occupant after 15 years of regular occupation if the property was acquired in a legal way, or 30 years of regular occupation regardless of how the occupant got it.
The commission's appeal process has also been questioned.
'The commission says implement the decision first, then appeal later,' added Nininahazwe, noting that many of the commission's rulings have been overturned in the courts. 'Today, there is a government initiative to set up a special court to address the land issues. But we feel that it will only confirm the commission's rulings.'
Some of the land grievances stem from earlier attempts at reparations. 'There were also those who were condemned of the 1972 massacres [mainly Hutus] in Burundi whose properties were seized and given as compensation to the victims,' noted Nininahazwe.
There are also those who illegally took possession of other people's land. 'It is not just a Hutu versus Tutsi issue. Sometimes it is an issue between brothers,' he explained.
|