Law, Land Reform and Social Justice: A case for Zimbabwe

Chapter One

Land Reform and its meaning in pre-colonial Zimbabwean Society.

Land has been defined in ordinary grammatical meaning generally as, 1” any part of the earth’s surface not covered by a body of water, the part of the earth’s surface occupied by continents and islands, 2 an area of ground with reference to its nature or composition: arable land”. Legally it has been defined as “any part of the earth’s surface that can be owned as property and everything annexed ton it by nature or by human hand, any legal interest held in land”. Economically it has been defined also as

“ Natural resources as a factor of production or as part of the earth marked off by natural or political boundaries or the like, a region or country” .

Having carefully analysed the different definitions being put forward it is important to mention that the meaning of land and extent of its significance vary from society to society. In most societies land is regarded merely as an economic factor or as a means of production.

Land in pre-colonial Zimbabwean society played a significant role in the religious, economic and political life of the black people and as a result shaped the outlook of most tribal societies in the country. Land ownership was always communal and not private. In shona tribal society land was regarded as a gift from God popularly known as Chipo Chamusikavanhu or Nyadenga . The land was therefore entrusted to the ancestors by God and held in trust by the community for the benefit of everyone in that community. The chief and council of elders had the responsibility of allocating land on behalf of the ancestors to those who were in need of land. It is important to point out that (Ranger 1975) land could never be sold or be owned privately . Because of traditional religious value of land it was therefore widely believed in pre-colonial Zimbabwean society that it could not be expropriated for exclusive private use and for purpose of profit at the expense of the whole community .  Thus the appropriation of land for private use as the Europeans led by Cecil John Rhodes did was considered a desecration and an affront to the culture and customary laws that governed access, control and ownership of land in Zimbabwe. Because of the sanctity of land even at time of colonial invasion the Shona people never suspected that the white people would take over their land. They believed that if the white colonialists attempted to take over their land by force, the spirit mediums and the dead ancestors would punish them severely. Martin & Johnson (1981) argue that, “this was due to the Mashona concept of something very sacred… chinoyera- belonging to the whole tribe but held in trust by the chiefs and elders whose duty it was to allot it to those who needed it. Land given to an individual did not become his property in the European sense of the word. It only meant that he could use it and that his family and descendants could have a first claim over its use…. Land was sacred because it contained the graves of ancestors. These ancestors were very part of the day today thinking of the people. People’s actions and behaviour were in one way or another affected by their belief in the proximity and power of their ancestors in the same way that Christianity and Islam have inspired some men’s thoughts and deeds… Land in which the ancestors were buried was not only sacred but it was also the link between the past, the present and future members of the tribe. The Mashona had nothing to fear from the whites, not knowing that the members of the invaders had been promised 1,500 000 acres of land and that they had the firepower to support their expropriation.  Once the Mashona realised what was happening an uprising was inevitable and in this the spirit mediums, the link between the dead and the living were to play a vital role “. It needs no overemphasis that the African conception of land was radically different from that of the west or America.