Kgatleng land owners unfazed by court battles
Kgatleng Landowners Pressure Group says it is unfazed by the continued legal battle with Kgatleng Land Board.
The Group says the fight by the land board is an abuse of power and relentless efforts to disenfranchise indigenous citizens, in the process wasting government financial resources.
“The Land Board is pursuing litigation that is destined for loss in any competent court and they know it. So far, the Kgatleng Land board and its parent Ministry have lost two court cases.
“In the third case that is ongoing, the Kgatleng land board has not made any filing or appearance at all the hearings. All these cases will ultimately be lost with costs to Government. The pursuit of the cases is driven by deep- rooted jealousy, vindictive personalities,” the Group’s spokesperson, Gilbert Sesinyi said. The two cases involved the transfer of land rights and the application
for approval of the Cadastral survey. According to Sesinyi at the centre of the decisions and court cases is a lie regarding the powers of the sub land board in respect of change of land use processes. “Before we deal with the powers of sub land board we need to make it clear to the incompetent management and Kgatleng Land board that sub land boards exercise delegated authority of Land boards,” he said this week. He explained after the court session that the Tribal Land Act does not limit the powers of the sub land board hence there is nowhere in the sub land board regulations or Act where the subordinate makes recommendations.
Sesinyi a land surveyor by profession stated that in any case, the Land board operates as an appellate body. “Where would clients appeal decisions if the Land board is part of decisions made by its subordinate? Section 31 of the Botswana Land board policy is clear where it says “Amongst the recommendations accepted with modifications was that Land boards should remain corporate bodies responsible for land administration and that subordinate land boards be given authority to make final decisions on all land use applications.
“It is embarrassing that when the document they issue on a daily basis ( Common Law Lease) is expressly written that the Land use can be changed with the written permission of Sub Land board, the Kgatleng land board still decides to go to court to establish the legal facts”. Sesinyi pointed out that the wording of the lease is pursuant to Statutory Instrument 36 of 2013 which grants the Sub Land boards power to issue and vary common law rights. The Town and Country planning supersedes the Tribal Land Act in planning decisions, he said. This, he said is contrary to an unfortunate belief by the Kgatleng Land board that they have the power to revoke planning decisions issued by the Kgatleng District Council.