Living on borrowed land

Most Malawians live and toil on customary land, portions they cannot prove to own. As the Land Bill awaits Parliament approval, how does this affect their capacity to participate in the capitalist economy and model of development? EPHRAIM NYONDO writes.

It could as well begin with Joseph Nkasa’s 2005 hit, Anasankha Molakwika.

“Pachiyambi/ Kalekalelo/Anasankha Molakwika [In the beginning/Back in the days/They made a wrong choice],” goes the chorus of the song some listeners tend to associate with politics.

Was Malawi right to choose capitalism over communism? At the beginning, the choice, it seemed, could not have been wrong. And history proves its worth. For instance, Britain rose on the back of capitalism to become one of the world’s pioneer developed nations. So did USA, the global economic superpower.

Even the stories of the Brics—a bloc of fast-growing economies comprising Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa—speak volumes of capitalism as the gospel of development.

But in Malawi, society’s structural issues continue to constrain capitalism penetration, eventually, putting to question capitalism’s capacity to remain the road of Malawi’s journey to development.

In its pure sense, capitalism entails an economic system based on the private ownership of the means of production, with the goal of making a profit.

At its heart sits the banking system which provides credit for capital accumulation, competitive markets and a price system.

But if you read the story of customary land use and governance in the country—a story that affects millions in the country—the entire vibe of capitalism as a hub for Malawi’s development comes into serious question.

For instance, since 1967, Wilfred Guta from Jombo Village, T/A Ngabu in Chikhwawa, has been farming and living on a 15-acre land he inherited from his father. He had unquestionable belief that the land belonged to him.

But the belief was put to question in October 2011.

“I was at home. Then two police officers from Nchalo came to my house with a letter. The letter indicated that I stop farming in that land because it had been sold to another company (name withheld). It even warned that further activities on the land would warrant an arrest,” he says.

So many others met Guta’s fate in this part of Chikhwawa—and most of them were ‘compensated’ with cash ranging from K3 000 to K5 000.

But Guta says he resisted the compensation and lodged a complaint with Nchalo police and district council office. But then district commissioner Felix Mkandawire indicated that the land Guta calls his own was “leased off and all the right procedures were followed”.

Even when he complained that ‘his land’ was changed ownership without his involvement, the country’s land laws only gives users right, not ownership right, to people living and toiling on customary land like Guta.

Institute for Policy Research development specialist Dr Henry Chingaipe notes that land deals seldom raise questions when they involve privately owned land because the proprietor directly ventures into negotiations with the buyer.

“Serious problems, however, emerge when you are dealing with customary land. Oftentimes, there is no one who can claim ownership rights of the land; people just have the users’ right. So, when leasing such a land, it is always the chiefs who make decisions on behalf of the people—even without consulting them,” explains Chingaipe.

Predictably, Guta’s predicament is a story of a majority of Malawians living and farming on customary land—a property which they informally hold, but is not legally recognised and entitled to them.

A majority of Malawians rely on customary land, but hardly know their rights.

Not only can these people, without the support of the law, get kicked off this land. Most importantly, according to Peruvian economist Hernando de Soto Polar, it also completely removes them from benefiting from capitalism.

In The Mystery of Capital: Why Capitalism Triumphs in the West and Fails Everywhere Else, Soto argues that at the heart of poverty in most developed countries is the failure of people to produce capital.

“The poor own assets they can use to generate capital for business but the capital is in defective form: they have houses and land, but not titles; crops, but no deeds: business, but not statues of incorporations. Without representation and documentation of their assets, these assets are dead capital,” reads the book.

What Soto argues reflect heavily on poor villagers like Guta. They can easily be kicked off their land. They do not have the title to the land they use, to mean they are left out of the banking system if they would want to seek a loan.

And Soto has a great advice for government that wants to lift people like Guta out of poverty.

“Leaders of the Third World and former communist nations need not wander the world’s foreign ministries and international financial institutions seeking their fortune. In the midst of their own poorest neighbourhoods and shantytowns, there are trillions of dollars, all ready to be put to use if only the mystery of how assets are transformed into live capital can be unravelled,” he writes.

One such a way is to revisit the administration of customary land in the country. Interestingly, according to Yvonne Mmangisa, executive director of Landnet National Coordinator, the Land Bill, which is currently in Parliament, tackles the land problem in question.

“There is a component in it which provides an option for local people to be registering the land they use. To mean, after registering, they will have a title deed.

“The challenge, perhaps, is that the provision advances that the question is optional. I would have loved if it were compulsory,” she says.

Calling for Parliament to consider the bill, Mmangisa adds that currently training is underway of people who will be responsible for sensitising locals to the bill.

“Technical people will be stationed at the traditional authority and these are the people who will spearhead civic education and again be critical in the registration,” he says.

Unarguably, if the bill passes, and locals like Guta manages to register their land and gets title deeds, they will be helped not just be evicted off the land but, most importantly, to participate and benefit fully from the fruits of capitalism, Malawi’s model of development.

Perhaps Nkasa’s song wouldn’t be relevant, then.