The Financial Gazette

Banner
Banner
  • Increase font size
  • Default font size
  • Decrease font size
Home Supplements New invasions shake SA, threaten investment

New invasions shake SA, threaten investment

E-mail Print PDF

Dumisani Ndlela, Staff Reporter

A RECENT spate of farm invasions targeting properties protected by bilateral investment protection ag-reements has vindicated critics of the Zimbabwe government and thrown the country’s bid to lure foreign investment into turmoil.


It has also shaken the corridors of power in South Africa, where investors were on the verge of pouring over a billion dollars into the country in investment and special packages in the form of credit guarantees for Zimbabwean companies, denied credit line for over a decade because of a high sovereign risk associated with the country.
Sources indicated that South Africa’s ambassador in Zimbabwe, Mlungisi Makalima, had already been instructed to intervene to save South African farmers caught up in the fresh wave of farm occupations.
This was after an activist civil rights group, AfriFo-rum, had asked Trade and Industry Minister, Rob Davies to intervene urgently to protect the lives and property of a South African citizen, Ray Finaughty, and his family in Zimbabwe.
Critics had raised doubts over Zimbabwe’s commitment to a Bilateral Invest-ment Promotion and Prot-ection Agreement (BIPPA) signed with South Africa after almost a decade of negotiations.
The Zimbabwe government had dismissed its critics, with Investment and Economic Planning Minis-ter, Elton Mangoma, saying they should not be judged by past performance. The inclusive government, acc-ording to Mangoma, had opened a new chapter and would maintain a clean record.
Zimbabwe, said Ma-ngoma, was ready for business, and analysts said this would have to be predicated upon respect for private property rights.
But sceptics had expr-essed doubt, insisting Zim-babwe remained unc-ommitted to any of the pacts it had signed, including the recent one with South Africa.
The BIPPA with South Africa was meant to promote and protect cross border investments by citizens and the corporate sector from the two countries.
Although the agreement is bilateral in nature, the spotlight remained on Zimbabwe, over which concerns were raised over the violation of property rights under the country’s agrarian reforms. While admitting that the deal with South Africa was significant, Deon Theron, the Commercial Farmers’ Union president, said their enthusiasm was qualified: the country had wilfully violated other bilateral investment protection deals signed with other countries during its controversial land reform progra-mme and, as farmers, they were still interested in finding out if Zim-babwe would ad-here to the agr-eement.
Interestingly, Theron was the one to pass news that the BIPPA with South Africa had come under test: Ray Finaughty, a South African citizen, was forced off his farm in Rusape under a fresh wave of farm invasions.
Finaughty’s farm is protected under the BIPPA signed with South Africa, as well as a Sou-thern African De-velopment Community Tri-bunal ruling that the land grabs we-re unlawful and that the Zimbabw-ean government should protect co-mmercial farmers who remained on land.
Two more farms were said to have been invaded, including one owned by a Dutch and Malaysian company and is also protected through a BIPPA.
Analysts said the recent spate of invasions is likely to hurt efforts to turn around the country’s recovering ec-onomy, which was earmarked to receive a windfall from neighbour South Afr-ica on the basis of the recent BIPPA deal.
South Africa was expected to inject massive cash into Zimbabwe’s mining, manufacturing and agricultural sectors as a result of the BIPPA, and was also expected to play a key role in projects likely to be undertaken to reconstruct Zimbabwe’s dilapidated infrastructure.
The Financial Gazette understands that there was also a commitment from South Africa to help restore Zimbabwe’s solvency; the country has defaulted on its offshore loan repayment obligations and has outstanding arrears running into billions of United States dollars.
Indications were that South Africa could avail substantial amounts of cash in credit lines to support Zimbabwe’s frail fiscus, while at the same time restoring credit facilities to Zimbabwe’s struggling companies which had suffered due to a high sovereign risk.

Comments (7)Add Comment
...
written by Sizanani, August 13, 2010
You must get to understand what is going on> There are white Rhodesian farmers who have taken South African citizenship and want to hold on to land through the technicalities of BIPPA s. They should have ceded land a long time ago. You will see white South African farmers who will hold on to land in their South Africa under such Agreements in future pretending to be Zimbabwan or Namibian nationals, whilst the blacks are deprived of their birthright. These BIPPAS have been instruments of keeping land by the whites of this country. I have worked with BIPPA's before and am still in the system. Theissue of SADC tribunal is dead and Zimbabwe's position is so clear and in fact we raised the wakeup call to other SADC countries regarding the counries' sovereignty. SADC will not replace the supremacy of each country's sovereignty. Le us open our eyes.
...
written by mahlawuluba palane, August 10, 2010
As long as there is no a*suarance of accessing "returns on capital invested" no sane person would invest in Zimbabwe. There has to be a benefit to the investor for investment to take place. In practical terms if you grow tomatoes once they ripen you expect to harvest them. However if you are denied the harvest would you plough the tomatoes again? So it is up to the powers that be to create an atmospere conducive to investment.
...
written by Charakupa, August 06, 2010
ViVA Welsman Ncube, Its time for the people of Mat to work up, they were used by Mugabe , now tsvangirai want to use them in the same way mugabe did by arguing them to rally behind Nkomo, Tsvangirai is saying they should rally behind Khupe and not a part led by one of their Ncube.
Only Stupid Ndebeles will not support Welshman
...
written by Tomasi, July 24, 2010
Quite an adventure… keep at it man, your almost nice and cheap balance bracelet there , thanks for the read!
...
written by kgwamz, June 28, 2010
Stop with these tribal sub-groupings already! So now we must have the Matebele, Karanga, Manyika, Venda, Zezuru, and Tonga Lands Restitution a*sociations as well? The old ,cliche by now, saying "United we stand, divided we fall" applies. We stand to achieve m*re as just Zimbabweans than 14 tribes.
...
written by pemberai, February 12, 2010
are white people with south African citizenship indigenous Africans? . the current black SA government will reluctantly engage itself in this problem. Serious engagement will question issues of black empowerment. remember SA is hinting on land redistribution as well. Notwithstanding the fact that they have in SA back dating to 1600s. these guys are not in the true sense people from Mzansi
...
written by Fadzimuke Hango Yapalala, February 12, 2010
We, Bakalanga, want our land now occupied by the" new makhiwas". This is what we went to war for. We didnt do so, so we could work on our land as employees of the new occupiers. The Bukalanga Lands Restitution a*sociation's main objective is to legitimately redress this anomaly.

Write comment
smaller | bigger

security code
Write the displayed characters


busy
 

Digital Edition

Banner



Banner

Polls