PARLIAMENT PASSES LAND ACQUISITION ACT AMENDMENTS,

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 HARARE 000199 SIPDIS SENSITIVE AF/S FOR SDELISI, LAROIAN, MRAYNOR NSC FOR SENIOR AFRICA DIRECTOR JFRAZER, DTEITELBAUM LONDON FOR CGURNEY PARIS FOR CNEARY NAIROBI FOR TPFL E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: PGOV PHUM PTER ASEC ECON EAGR ZI SUBJECT: PARLIAMENT PASSES LAND ACQUISITION ACT AMENDMENTS, ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING BILL REF: (A) 03 HARARE 2451 (B) 03 HARARE 2421 (C) HARARE 1506 AND PREVIOUS ¶1. (SBU) SUMMARY: After considerable debate, Parliament on January 28 passed a controversial Land Acquisition Amendment (LAA) Bill. The bill scales back due process protections for property owners and expands the categories of properties that may be confiscated under the government's land reform program. Passing on January 29 without partisan bickering was the Bank Use Promotion and Anti-Money-Laundering (AML) Bill, which boosts the state's investigatory powers in the financial sector. Parliament adjourned January 29 and is scheduled to reconvene March 23. END SUMMARY. ¶2. (U) The LAA removes a requirement of actual notice being served on a property owner or other parties in interest (e.g., mortgage holders),instead requiring only that notice be published in the government's official gazette. It eliminates the option previously available under law for a property owner to avoid compulsory acquisition of one property by offering another, and invalidates all such arrangements previously agreed to. The Act eliminates limiting criteria relating to the nature of the land compulsorily acquired, effectively expanding the scope of land reform to encompass not just rural farm land, but also (1) agro-industrial properties, (2) plantations of timber, tea, coffeee, citrus fruit and sugar cane, (3) components of export processing zones and properties operating under permit of the Zimbabwe Investment Center, and (4) approved conservancies. In the same vein, it repeals the Hippo Valley Agreement Act, whereby the GOZ had granted certain agricultural concessions in the Hippo Valley. (Comment: The South African conglomerate Anglo-American is a major investor in Hippo Valley and appears to be targeted by this provision.) The Act also removes as a defense to compulsory acquisition the fact that the designated property is the owner's only piece of land. ¶3. (SBU) The LAA passed after some procedural irregularities and a relatively quick but contentious debate. Bills are required to be "gazetted" (officially published) at least 14 days prior to their introduction to the floor. After being unavailable to interested parties, the LAA first appeared in a special gazette issued December 5 but dated November 28, and was under consideration by the Parliament less than 14 days after the date of actual publication. The Parliamentary Legal Committee issued an adverse report on the bill by mid-December, finding the Act provisions to violate Section 16 (dealing with compulsory acquisition of property) and Section 18 (guaranteeing protection of law) of the Constitution. Debate on the bill was uncharacteristically sharp and detailed, with Minister for Agriculture Joseph Made and Minister of Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs Patrick Chinamasa figuring prominently. Invoking a law denying MPs with direct pecuniary interest in legislation the opportunity to speak or vote on the legislation, MDC Shadow Minister for Legal Affairs David Coltart moved on January 21 to have all MPs who had been allotted farms under the GOZ's land reform be excused from debate and the vote on the bill. He presented a list of MPs with farms (including several alleged multiple farm owners) but his motion failed after a lengthy furor involving chaotic shouting matches and temporary adjournment. ¶4. (U) The AML Bill passed without significant debate just one day after its second reading (three readings are required before passage). By its own terms, the law is intended to steer more cash into the national banking system and to enhance state powers to suppress money-laundering. The Bill establishes a special investigative unit under the Reserve Bank Governor to implement the law with support from the police. It prohibits settlement in cash of debts exceeding five million Zimdollars (approx. USD 1,400) and requires parastatals and traders to bank surplus cash. It imposes record-keeping requirements and limits on fees and cash withdrawals at financial institutions. The Unit Director is empowered to require institutions to disclose any records and information on any transaction. Inspectors or police are empowered to search any person and to seize any cash suspected to be held unlawfully, subject to a subsequent hearing before a magistrate. Parliamentary staff told us that the Budget and Finance Committee played a meaningful role in the bill's crafting, marching in a small army of banking and finance experts that convinced the Minister of Justice (and Acting Finance Minister) to make constructive changes before its passage. We have conveyed the Bill's full text to AF/S and to Treasury. ¶5. (SBU) COMMENT: At least two impetuses lie behind the LAA. First, it retroactively "legalizes" GOZ acts in implementing land reform that heretofore were unlawful -- essentially invalidating innumerable court orders held by evicted property holders. In this regard, it discards the GOZ's assertion at Abuja and elsewhere that farm owners may retain one farm. Second, it signals commencement of the next phase of GOZ nationalization of Zimbabwe's assets: indeed, legal proceedings and forcible evictions of owners of agribusinesses, conservancies, and safari operators already are vigorously underway. Real parties in interest behind the evictions usually conceal their identities but uniformly have turned out to be ruling party cronies when known. Following on the heels of December's executive order permitting seizure of agricultural equipment from former property owners (ref B),the LAA's passage ironically evinces a heavily legalistic dimension of the GOZ's evolving campaign to bring the country's assets under the effective control of the ruling party elite. The parliament's prominent role in this reflects its growing significance as a debating forum and institution in form, but in substance it remains a reliable appendage of the ruling party. ¶6. (SBU) COMMENT (CONT'D): The GOZ's war on corruption is the publicized impetus behind the AML Bill. In addition, we understand that the need to extend a few statutory instruments that were about to expire and a priority on dealing with foreign currency pricing of services added some urgency to the bill's fast track. Perhaps most salient, however, was the GOZ's desire to bring more within its control the considerable segment of society here that operates outside the sometimes draconian and often nonsensical vagaries of Zimbabwe's formal economy. The enhanced powers afforded the State (liberalized warrantless searches, for example) can be expected to be used against selected business rivals and political opponents of ruling party principals, both inside and outside the party. SULLIVAN