'Only Mugabe has power to withdraw land offer letters'

The Ministry of Lands and Rural Resettlement has no powers to withdraw offer letters it would have issued out to farmers, the Administrative Court has ruled. Justice Herbert Mandeya said only the President had such powers.

He made the ruling in the case in which the Lowveld Sugar Cane Growers Association sued the Minister of Lands and Rural Resettlement for withdrawing their offer letters.

The association was offered land by Government under the land reform programme through offer letters from the Ministry of Lands and Rural Resettlement.

The ministry later withdrew the letters on the strength of Clause 7 in the Agricultural Land Resettlement Act.

The paragraph reads, "The minister reserves the right to withdraw or change this offer letter if he deems it necessary, or if you are found in breach of any of the set conditions."

The association argued that the ministry had no such powers, adding that Clause 7 of the offer letter issued to the members was in fact prohibited by law and, therefore, not enforceable.

They further argued that the Agricultural Land Settlement Act Chapter 20:01, which empowers the ministry to issue offer letters to beneficiaries of the land reform, empowered only the President of Zimbabwe to withdraw the letters.

Justice Mandeya agreed with the association's contention, saying the legislation singled out the President and expressly empowered him in terms of Section 12 of the Act to withdraw the offer letters.

"The lawmaker, therefore, deliberately authorised the President only to withdraw offer letters," he said.

"The failure to empower the respondent (ministry) to do so was deliberate. In Sections 7 and 8 of the Act, the lawmaker specifically empowered the respondent to establish schemes, make other provision for the settlement of persons on agricultural land and issue leases. But in Section 12 of the Act, the lawmaker, despite knowledge of the existence and power of the respondent, deliberately authorised the Head of State only to withdraw offer letters."

Justice Mandeya added: "The court is convinced that the exclusion of the respondent was deliberate. It means that the respondent was not empowered to "retake possession of land" that he had offered to specific beneficiaries.

"Accordingly, the decision of the respondent to withdraw the offers of land made to applicants members dated December 8, 2016 is hereby set aside. The respondent is to bear applicant's cost of suit."