ブログトップ

Lifestyle&平和&アフリカ&教育&Others

afriqclass.exblog.jp

Why&How Negrão先生はモザンビーク土地法(1997年)成立に尽力したのか?~農民にとっての土地、学者

Negrao先生についてはこちらを先に
→http://afriqclass.exblog.jp/17641224/


ジョゼ・ネグラオン先生が、どういう想いで土地問題に関わったのか、以下のインタビューを。訳す暇がなく、すみません。アフリカ中の農民の土地の権利が危うくなっている現在において、一読の価値があると思います。一応抜粋を貼り付けておきます。

そして、先生と一緒にこの土地法制定に尽力したのは、お馴染みのUNAC(モザンビーク全国農民組織)です。

「ゾーニング」という、プロサバンナで今問題になっている概念が、当時どう議論されていたかに触れる良い機会でもあります。

なお、先日紹介したモザンビーク市民社会組織が何故、「第二の構造調整」とG8 New Alliance for Food and Nutrition for Africaと称したのか良く分かります。

■Interview with Prof José Negrão, Hero of Mozambique's Poor
Dr. José Negrão speaks with Oxfam America about the 1997 Land Law that has created opportunities for thousands of farming families in central Mozambique.
「ネグラオン博士がモザンビーク中部の何千という農家に機会を与えた1997年の土地法について語る」
http://www.mokoro.co.uk/files/13/file/lria/interview_with_professor_jose_negrao.pdf

土地法に関わったのは?
  It was around 1990, more or less, when the civil war peace agreement was being discussed. At that time the first thing we saw was the Dominglatura [the urban elite] mainly in Maputo, started realizing that the war was more or less over.

 So they started to grab land in order to do business. For example, [they did business] speculation with white Zimbabweans, with white South Africans, and God knows whoever else would come.

 So at the time of the peace agreement [it was in1992], we started foreseeing problems of scarcity of land in the countryside, not because all of the other land was being used, but because land with infrastructure was being allocated to new people, not in the field, but to ministers, foreign ministers, these kinds of people.

 Everyone [government officials and businessmen] became very afraid because of the resettlement of about five million Mozambicans who had been refugees in neighboring countries, and also internally displaced people. They were returning to their land.

 At this time, the World Bank came up with a proposition, which was when structural adjustment programs were very strong in Africa.

 The World Bank came up with the same proposition they did with every other program in the 90s, by titling every single family. The meaning of it was that they did not recognize communal rights, just individual rights, titling families and not communities. That was the bank's proposal. They assumed that this type of titling was something feasible.

 I should tell you that, at that time, just ten percent of the land in Africa was titled. Titling is really very complex, because it is a process. Just for you to have an idea, and for the readers in the US to have an idea, in my country, we have not been able- until today- to issue an identity card for every single citizen. Can you imagine the titling of land for each

 It would mean three million titles, it would be an unending process. It would be impossible, but that was the proposal of the World Bank.

 The government came with a proposal called "zoning." This means [the government would issue] a specific area for the private sector, another area for small holder, another area for state reserves like nature reserves, another area for towns, etc.
 
 I was working at the University, and wrote a paper saying this plan was not feasible and that it was a mistake. The proposal of the government was one hundred years old. It was the same proposal of the Portuguese settlers, from the end of the 19th century when they created native reserves.

 The proposal was to keep the dualistic idea that small holders would keep being small holders and that they would not become entrepreneurs, and they looked to small holders just like employees of the private investors.
 
 Why not think of the transformation of the small holder, individually or collectively? It can be done. So that was the main point, and I tried to criticize that position, of zoning by property, and not zoning by the potential of the land to be used for agriculture or cattle breeding. I believed that there was a possibility for collective titling, and not just for individual titling.
 
 The main point was that even if we agreed, technically it was totally impossible to do it. The World Bank tried to do it [private titling] in Ghana, and in ten years they spent something like 50 million dollars, and they have been able to title just 10 percent of the families.

 The point is, what is the alternative? And that's the moment when I came up with an alternative. 

 Why does the State only recognize the rights of land occupancy, the rights of the people, only when they have a written title or a piece of paper? Why doesn't the State also recognize the oral testimony of these people?

 Several civil society organizations read the paper. When they read it, I started receiving calls, and when it came to the press, several people called me, and said "we are nterested in developing these ideas." And that was the moment when it started.

 A lot of organizations followed suit, and we went to the Parliament and won. It was a lot of lobbying. More than 50,000 people in this country were conducting a land campaign.

One day I woke up, and I said "I'm afraid!"
I'm not supposed to have 50,000 people behind me. It's incredible! Even today there is always someone that recognizes me, and says, "Wow, this is the person that was involved in this thing. I was not expecting it.

The movement was much bigger than any initiative on my side, the movement was theirs.
The message was to orient to the demand. It was not supply driven, but demand driven. They said "this is what we want!"
[PR]
by africa_class | 2013-04-18 15:23 | 【考】土地争奪・プロサバンナ/マトピバ
<< モザンビークで、ブラジル鉱物資... 追悼:農村の貧しい人の側に立ち... >>