Food and Land Justice Program

Transcription

1 March 2013 Edition 3, Number 1 RELUFA Food and Land Justice Program Contents: Editorial: The Herakles Farms (SGSOC) oil palm plantation Project : The Saga Continues.1 The Communication strategy of The Fair Fruit Project bears fruit 2 The State of Cameroon neglects The Right to Food of the people Mudemba..4 The Impact of written Land Laws on Land Rights of local and indigenous population in Cameroon..6 Editorial: The Herakles Farms (SGSOC) oil palm Plantation Project: The Saga continues Jaff Napoleon Bamenjo, RELUFA s Coordinator For over a year now, advocacy campaigns have been engaged by RELUFA and its partners to stop the Herakles Farms (SGSOC) oil palm plantation project in some villages in the Ndian and Kupe Manenguba divisions of the South West region of Cameroon or to influence and improve the framing of the project. Many local communities are against this project that will deprive them from precious land and forest resources that constitute their source of livelihood. The project is located in a forest area that can be described as a biodiversity hotspot with already many conservation projects, and is the only remaining land on which the surrounding population depends upon for agriculture and collection of nontimber forest products. Besides the scale and inappropriate location of this large-scale land acquisition, the convention signed between Herakles farms and the Cameroonian government is unbalanced and too favorable to the company. RELUFA and other partners campaigning to bring attention to this project have clearly documented this in previous studies. Although Herakles Farms claims the project will create jobs, improve infrastructure and create other benefits, similar projects in Cameroon have usually converted self-sustaining farmers to plantation laborers. The case of Herakles farms planned project is quite telling. That company for instance signed a 99 year lease with the government of Cameroon, and will pay $1 per hectare per year if the land is used and $0.5 per hectare per year if the land is not used. Meanwhile, similar parcels used by the local population for other farming activities like cocoa cultivation yield over 100 times more for each individual. For this and other reasons, Herakles Farms oil palm plantation project has generated a lot of controversy with serious concerns raised by civil society organizations concerned with food insecurity threats such large-scale land acquisition may engender. The ongoing national and international campaign against their project has prompted Herakles Farms to increase their publicity for image cleansing probably due to commercial pressures that they may be receiving from their investors. At the same time, Herakles Farms is negotiating for more land with some villages outside the initial concession area where it conducted an environmental and social impact assessment. But many villages like Badun, Betock, BombeKonye, New Konye, Ntale, Meangwe, Mokange, Ndiba etc have refused to enter negotiations, bullied or lured to sign land deals with Herakles Farms while others like Talangaye, Sikam, Manyemen, Ebanga, Samblalibathat were initially unsuspecting have started asking for renegotiation of the memorandum of understanding earlier signed with Herakles Farms.

2 Food and Land Justice Page 2 on 6 Editorial ". others like Talangaye, Sikam, Manyemen, Ebanga, Samblalibathat were initially unsuspecting have started asking for renegotiation of the memorandum of understanding earlier signed with Herakles Farms." Although Herakles Farms have signed a convention with the government of Cameroon, it has not yet been accorded a land lease, which according to Cameroon law is only signed by the President of the Republic for any land deal above 50 hectares. Herakles has however started operating in some land blocks like in Nguti for instance. But the Cameroonian government is curiously silent and not forthcoming in the midst of these practices by Herakles farms. The Herakles Farms large-scale land acquisition is a test case for Cameroon and all necessary avenues need to be explored to continue to convey the message. There is definitely a mismatch between current beneficial uses of the land by small farm holdersand ceding the land to Herakles Farms. The communication strategy of the Fair Fruit project bears fruit Michèle Danleu, in charge of Marketing for the Fair fruit Project Naomi Bayeck, RELUFA Intern Through its Fair Trade program, RELUFA also monitors the impact of land grabbing. Partnership agreements between the Cameroonian government and the European Union advocate for Free Trade and also facilitate entry of multinationals to Cameroon where the means of establishing their business is subtle. Officially launched in 2009 in Njombe, the RELUFA FAIR FRUIT project involved evicted farmers and local dryers who formed a Common Initiative Group called GIC Esperance. The objective of this project was to market dried fruits harvested locally by the farmers, while lobbying to make public the problems these farmers went through. The advocacy campaign was quite peculiar because the commercialization of the dried fruits brought many persons, both at the national and international levels. In the communication strategy of the Fair Fruit project, an action plan was developed and implemented in such a way that information can reach the target directly. The story of the farmers evicted from their land was narrated on the back of the fair fruit packages. Thus, people who bought the product were read the message. To reach even a wider audience, several additional actions were undertaken: Some of the direct actions involved: Participation in several national and international trade fairs and exhibitions including those organized yearly by the American School of Yaoundé, the Promote 2011 trade fair in Yaounde, the Ebolowa 2010 agro pastoral show; The sale of fair fruits products in strategic locations frequently visited by people who can influence the top management of the company concerned, notably in areas like the US Embassy, the American School, the Peace Corps office in Yaoundé, renowned hotels in Yaoundé and Douala; Presentations of the project in American Presbyterian churches and international organizations by the Joining Hands Companionship facilitator:

3 Page 3 on 6 Food and Land Justice Several Christian communities were informed of the story of farmers from Njombé. The point was to make them aware of the fact that their consumption habits had an impact on the lives of the people in the countries of the south and they had to make companies from their country accountable; A documentary called '' The big banana'' was made by a Cameroonian film maker. It helped to inform the public on the situation of the expropriated farmers. After a first screening that failed in Yaounde, Cameroon, this documentary was screened in France, the United States, Qatar and in Belgium at the European Parliament. It should be noted that this last projection was the one that could truly change the lives of communities of Njombé because the European Union annually awards nearly 5 million grant to the banana sector in Cameroon. In addition, the film received a very positive feedback from the Cameroonian Diaspora who donated $ 2,500 in 2012 to support the fair fruit project; The publication of articles on the RELUFA website. All these actions highlighted above enabled to make the situation of the farmers known by politicians, diplomats, national and international businessmen. However, there were obstacles in the implementation of this communication strategy. For example, the persons in charge of the project were threatened by some powerful people in the country about spreading the message on the dispossession of local communities from their land by a multinational company. There were also difficulties in projecting the The Big Banana film in Cameroon. After expropriation, farmers were a party to legal proceedings against the company in order to be compensated and RELUFA accompanied and supported them. After about 12 years of prosecution, they could not succeed in obtaining any form of redress from the courts. But we can say communication by RELUFA through the fair fruits project was fruitful. In fact, in January 2013, an agreement was made between the farmers and the multinational company concerned and by virtue of the agreement; the Farmers were paid some compensation by the company. The precondition given by the company was that the fair fruit packages be removed from circulation by RELUFA. This was done and the farmers could therefore receive their compensation. The State of Cameroon neglects the Right to Food of the people of Mudemba Michèle during a trade fair at the American School of Yaoundé "The sale of fair fruits products in strategic locations frequently visited by people who can influence the top management of the company concerned, notably in areas like the US Embassy, the American School, the Peace Corps office in Yaoundé, two renowned hotels in Yaoundé and Douala" Sandrine Kouba, RELUFA s Program Assistant In a context of global food crisis, there are increasing claims on the right to food. For the committee on economic, social and cultural rights, the right to [appropriate] food is realized when every man, woman and child, alone or in a community, has physical and economic access at all times to enough food or to means to get it in a sustainable manner, and which does not interfere with the enjoyment of other human rights (health, housing, education,...). The right to food therefore includes access to the resources and means to ensure and produce one s own food: access to land, property security, access to water, seeds, to loans, to technology and to both local and regional markets, notably for vulnerable and discriminated groups; access to traditional fishing grounds for fishing communities that depend on them for their livelihoods; access to sufficient income to ensure a decent life, including for rural and industrial workers, and access to social security and assistance to the poor.

4 Food and Land Justice Page 4 on 6 "The ratification of the ICESCR obliges Cameroon to respect, protect and fulfill the right to food which are obligations determined by the guidelines on the right to food." Farm labourers in the Herakles Plantation "With the many irregularities observed in the agreement between the State and SGSOC, it appears that the State fails to comply with its obligations and leaves the people of Mundemba and its surroundings under the influence of the company." This right is included in the ICESCR which Cameroon ratified on 27 June In the preamble to its constitution, it is recognized to every citizen the right to development, and thus a country's natural resources should be enhanced to improve on the well-being of all citizens without discrimination. In Article 25, the constitution recognizes the right to an adequate standard of living for everyone, in particular to allow access to adequate food. It also states in its Article 45 the primacy of international treaties ratified by Cameroon over national legislation. These provisions should normally allow Cameroonian courts to guarantee the right to food. The ratification of the ICESCR obliges Cameroon to respect, protect and fulfill the right to food, which is an obligation determined by the guidelines on the right to food. This obligation to respect the right to food is essentially an obligation of abstention. It is the obligation of States to refrain from taking measures which have the effect of depriving individuals from their access to food. This implies, according to J. Ziegler, the first UN special rapporteur on the right to food, that governments refrain from any arbitrary action which would impede the exercise of this right or hinder access to food. (...) This obligation is violated when, for example, a government arbitrarily decides to evict people from their land or move them, especially when this land was their main source of food (...). According to the Maastricht Guidelines, the obligation to protect the right to food also includes the responsibility of the State to ensure that private organizations or individuals, including transnational corporations under its jurisdiction, do not deprive individuals of their economic, social and cultural rights. States are responsible for violations of these rights when, they abstain to control, by lacking enough diligence, the behavior of these nonstate actors. Finally, the obligation to fulfill is to act, to the maximum of its available resources, to gradually achieve the full realization of the right to food by all appropriate means, including particularly the adoption of legislation. This requirement means that States must first facilitate the attainment of the right to food by creating an environment that enables individuals and groups to feed on their own, and secondly they must achieve the right to food for those who are unable to feed themselves, for reasons beyond their control, by distributing food or implementing programs of social protection. With the many irregularities observed in the agreement between the State and SGSOC, a subsidiary of Herakles Farms it appears that the State fails to comply with its obligations and leaves the people of Mundemba and its surroundings under the influence of the company because these people are deprived of land, water, compensation, and sufficient incomes to ensure adequate food. Indeed, the land concession was granted in an area inhabited by about 25,000 people. This presence of people depending mainly on agriculture for their livelihood predicts a difficult cohabitation in the future, because of the land shortage that will eventually be caused by the company. SGSOC claims that its project will not move communities. However, the contract gives it the exclusive right to grow crops in this concession and the right to extend the concession indefinitely, "according to its will." This will inevitably displace local populations, forced to seek land elsewhere. SGSOC should therefore provide compensation for populations which are likely to lose their land and engage in a program to promote alternative means for their livelihood. Unfortunately, the SGSOC ESIA contains no compensation plan and programs benefiting populations remain insufficient and can hardly compensate in the long run, the losses which the communities will suffer from, because of restrictions on their access to land and resources. This will cause even more movement of people in search of land.

5 Page 5 on 6 According to Article 2.1, the convention is established for a period of 99 years. This is truly a mortgage on the future of the surrounding populations. The offspring of the residents (about 4 generations!) will be forced to live together with this investor, and will have to face land shortages induced by its presence. Moreover, it is not certain that the Cameroonian legislation on minimum wage and other social worker protections will apply to employees of SGSOC. Indeed, the agreement allows the company to pay employees according to "minimum wage rates determined on the basis of productivity and efficiency" and freely negotiate the terms of dismissal of employees. Given that Article 22.2 of the contract provides that the convention takes precedence over all other laws outside of the Constitution, SGSOC has the right to pay employees below the minimum wage rate recommended by Cameroonian law because of the "efficiency criterion". In addition, it appears that SGSOC employees have a limited legal protection. Moreso, the contract gives SGSOC the Food and Land Justice right to use at no expense, unlimited amounts of water in the land concession. Therefore, from a contractual point of view, SGSOC clearly has priority access to water compared to local communities. The State is responsible for ensuring that the inhabitants rights recognized by the Constitution and the international conventions it has ratified are respected. But Article 23.3 of the contract does not allow it to, because it binds the Government to making sure that rights granted to the investor in the agreement suffer no derogation, nor any restriction of any kind whether by action or inaction of the Government. With the ratification of the tenth country (Uruguay) to the Optional Protocol on economic, social and cultural rights, a complaint mechanism for victims of violations of the right to food will be set up. Cameroon has not yet ratified this protocol. Therefore the population cannot use this mechanism to have access to justice at the international level. The government of Cameroon should therefore recall its prerogatives by ensuring the right to food for its people. "The State is responsible for ensuring that the inhabitants rights recognized by the Constitution and the international conventions it has ratified are respected. But Article 23.3 of the contract does not allow it to." The Impact of Written Land Laws on Land Rights of local and indigenous population in Cameroon Clemence Martiale Tabodo, Food and Land Justice Program Assistant The introduction of written land law in Cameroon has brought the disruption of lifestyles and the regulation of the relationship of people to land and resources. A gradual dispossession of land rights of indigenous and local communities began in the early years of colonial rule (both German, French and British), which culminated in the land reform of 1974 and which left rural populations without ownership rights on land and resources. The advent of colonial rule resulted in the reduction in the geographic and substantive scope of the customary rights of the people in their territory. The concept of "vacant lands without masters", which is a cornerstone of dispossession of land rights of local communities has reduced the substance of the rights of local communities through marginalization, or worse still, ignorance of the local usage of land and resources. It has limited the relationship of the people to land and resources to predominantly agricultural purposes, in full ignorance of the local cultures and methods of production like collecting, gathering and hunting. Land requirements for agriculture provided the basis for determining the areas to be reserved for future community use. " Land requirements for agriculture provided the basis for determining the areas to be reserved for future community use."

6 Food and Land Justice Page 6 on 6 «The amount of compensation is in fact largely lower than the value of the expropriated land and does not enable the people to replace it with goods of equal." RELUFA NETWORK FIGHTING AGAINST HUNGER ADDRESS B.P 1003 Yaoundé - Cameroun PHONE : (237) info@relufa.org We are on the Web! Find us at : This failure of the colonial administration with respect to land tenure led to a partial identification of the traditional rights of communities, characterized by a centralized land management based on dispossession of all indigenous of lands deemed "vacant and without master". The questioning of customary rights of indigenous people on their land in Cameroon is also attributed to Ordinance No. 74/1 of 6 July 1974 on land tenure, which has made registration or the ownership of a land title the sole method for land proprietorship and has put under the control of the State all unregistered land. By proclaiming the State guardian of land for which people do not have land titles and imposing registration as the only method for land ownership, the system denies the people s customary land rights and thus allows the State to easily have available land to cede. The registration procedure is difficult to follow by the population and focuses only on land occupied or used by them. Within the framework of large-scale cession of land, the State has the right to evict these people from land on which they logically have customary ownership rights. The State has no obligation to find them a new place to live or carry out their activities as they are not considered as the owners of the land. A ridiculous compensation is given as counterpart for the loss of crops and installations because of the cession. Therefore, the plots used by the rural populations for subsistence farming are often found in the hands of the agribusiness. This constitutes a threat to their food security. Such is the case with the concession allotted to the American company Herakles Farms by the government for the establishment of a large industrial oil palm plantation and refinery on an area of hectares of land in the Southwest region of Cameroon through a 99 year land lease, without prior consultation of the local residents. The concession boundaries were drawn in the middle of residents farms, without regard of customary law, and will inevitably oblige people to leave. Expropriation helps make even more precarious the rights of local people who could have managed to overcome the obstacles linked to the registration procedure. In fact, the expropriation procedure is dominated by the administration, which determines the public utility character of a case. And in the absence of a standard for defining what is of public interest, this determination can sometimes seem subjective. An author, OWONA could notice that public interest is revealed as a potentially expandable concept, allowing the State to perform actions of dispossession without violating constitutional compliance with ownership rights. For example, the construction of an oil pipeline between Chad and Cameroon was decided in the public interest, despite the many predictable social and environmental impacts of this operation. In addition, the terms of compensation encourage the State to resort to expropriation. The amount of compensation is in fact largely lower than the value of the expropriated land and does not enable the people to replace it with goods of equal value. The most exposed victims to this form of loss of property rights are local people who were formerly customary owners of large areas of land, and who, after braving the constraints of registration may still lose their land against ridiculous compensation. Finally, it appears that the precariousness is characteristic of land rights of rural populations in Cameroon. The development of industrial plantations, the cession of almost all of Cameroon s forests suggests an accentuation of this insecurity. The current land reform should take into account the rights of local and indigenous communities, without compromising the ability of the State to define and implement a coherent land policy and a natural management of the territory. The State will have to achieve a synthesis between traditional rights and the rights written by a formal recognition of the land for the benefit of local communities and the indigenous population.

7