landgrab in north-kivu province of d r congo: the real

1 | P a g e

Landgrab in North-Kivu Province of D R Congo:

The real situation and its consequences on small-scale farmer.

DRAFT REPORT

Simplex Kambale Malembe

Goma, Democratic Republic of Congo

May 2011.

2 | P a g e

REPORT OF THE STUDY ON LANDGRABBING AND ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR

SMALL-SCALE FARMERS IN THE NORTH-KIVU PROVINCE.

WORK PLAN AND TABLE OF CONTENTS:

0. Word from the consultant.

I. General Introduction.

II. Presentation of the North Kivu province.

1. Administrative presentation.

2. Presentation of the land administration plan.

III. As concerns the occupation of rural land in North Kivu.

1. List of plantations in North Kivu.

2. List of farms in Nord Kivu.

3. Some comments.

IV. Farms and plantations having belonged to CNKI blocks.

V. Problem of parcs and reserves in North Kivu province.

VI. Big land negotiations in the last ten years.

VII. Summary of motivations of actors behind the land grabbing.

VIII. Land law in DRC and its implications on farm land in North Kivu province.

1. The position of the two land management systemse.

2. The law on fundamental principles of agriculturep.

3. Law relating to relationship between customary chiefs and agricultural producers

in North Kivuu.

4. Characterisitics of land system in force.

5. Developping practices and customs.

6. Patial Conclusion.

IX. Initiatives at the regional, national and international level.

X. Some cases of farmer struggle which could serve as examples.

XI. Some reccomendations and strategiy elements to various leaders of EAFF.

XII.Some business models for the farmer organizations and other actors.

List of abbreviations.

3 | P a g e

0. WORD FROM THE CONSULTANT:

The report comes after several months of contract signing, which was practically achieved in

October 2010.

This delay is due mainly to several facts; the time taken for the tryearsfer of the funds for

work came a little later, basically at the beginning of 2011, when the consultant had already

taken other engagements with other partners in the first quarter of the year.

Then, continuing insecurity in some parts of the province resulted in, the repeated

postponement of the task of collecting reliable data.

At the stage of producing this report, we sincerely thank the leaders of EAFF for the trust and

confidence they have had in us and above all the patience they have shown in the production

of this report.

The province of North Kivu is not only large (larger than RWANDA and BURUNDI put

together). This also reflects not only the difficropies in covering this large area but also and

above all the different realities in the region.

We also thank all our investigators/researchers deployed on ground, where, for reasons of

strategy, the consultant could not make to due to security factors.

Their courage and determination were great lessons of patriotism and selflessness for us.

Our special thanks go to Mr. PALUKU MIVIMBA, the president of the FOPAC and member

of the Board of Directors of EAFF, who has given us moral support, sometimes in difficrop

times that almost discouraged us.

It would be ungrateful to ignore the work and the availability of tribal chiefs, heads of

different departments (land titles, land registry, mining services…). We remain grateful for

the qualities of information given to us despite the difficrop context in which many of them

work in.

They are real fighters.

The farmer declarations and availability are evidence that the phenomenon of land grabbing is

a reality in North Kivu province despite attempts of falsification/trickery by other actors.

We truly appreciated, any information they have given us throughout our investigations.

Finally, for the logistics service that the "FAT / Great Lakes" Forum des Amis de la Terre -

Forum of Friends of Land, we can only thank all the leaders of this organization, the CEO

who has edited this report.

This work is a first in its essence and its ambitions on the issue in North Kivu province. As

such it must have imperfections that would take of some value to many readers. We are aware

of this. Indeed, census work, for identification and production of a strategy proposal for

reclaiming land rights is not an easy task. We must also bring into fore the contextual,

security and administrative difficropy which was an obstacle in accessing all the data that

would have enabled us to respond to the expectations of all.

It was a must for us to dare. This is what is important. It is here then that we must also thank

the leaders of EAFF for having dared and sustained the initiative. The land issue is one of the

most sensitive issues in the province of North Kivu. We lived this reality during our

investigations with statements et and sometimes reservations and resistances we met from our

respondents.

This investigation opens a new field of research action for practitioners and scientists from all

sides. It therefore suffers the fate of pioneer. The innocent martyr. Martyr due to its

imperfection, but also a martyr by what it dared, daring to tackle a theme which many

4 | P a g e

actors/players would have rather left it silent in the context of the province of North Kivu. We

also recognize this.

This draft will go through the process of developing into a final report as agreed in the

contract of service and as such, it is likely to undergo amendments according to the

observations of one or the other starting with the sponsors, that is, EAFF, the main actors

involved, that is the small-scale producers and other actors contacted like traditional leaders,

heads of services/departments and large-scale farmers contacted. .

SIMPLEX KAMBALE MALEMBE

CONSULTANT.

I. GENERAL INTRODUCTION.

It is in executing the service contract signed between the consultant on the one hand and the

Farmers' Federation EAFF, that a study on land grabbing and its implications for small-scale

farmers in the province of North Kivu was conducted. This study, done in several phases

eventually spread over 5 of the 6 territories of North Kivu province; for security reasons, we

could not access the territory of WALIKALE.

The major concern of EAFF, in sponsoring this study can be summarized as follows:

� To have as much as possible detailed information that will enable it to position itself

well as regards the phenomenon of massive land acquisition in North-Kivu province.

� To highlight/identify elements for advocacy at the national, regional and international

level that favour the small-scale producer in North-Kivu province in order to

safeguard his rights against land grabbing.

So, it was for the consultant and his team to collect information around the following points:

� Identify literature on land grab in the region.

� Analyze the legal framework (land law) and lthe local practices on land management

in relation to their implication on the small-scale producer.

� Analyze the motivations of the authors of land grabbing and identify cases that have

already taken place and those that are ongoing.

5 | P a g e

� Highlight the implications of this phenomenon of land grabbing on the small-scale

producer.

� Identify attempts and forms of « resistance » or actions undertaken by the small-scale

producers to defend and protect their rights as concerns this phenomenon.

� To give recommendations and strategies to be implemented by EAFF in order to

protect the rights of small producers in the province.

The study took place for a period of three months and had the following main steps:

� The collection and exploitation of necessary documentation.

� Training of investigators/researchers on the field work.

� Field work: this was done twice. The first time, in the month of December 2010 and

the second time in march 2011. The field work was coordinated by the consultant

who supervised the investigators (Beni, Lubero and Rutshuru territories).

� Data compilation and comparison with the different documents available to us.

� Preparation of the first draft of the report.

The report comprises three main parts except the introduction and conclusion.

These are:

1. Presentation of the North-Kivu province.

2. Issues related to the land grabbing.

3. The sutuation of the land grabbing phenomenon.

4. Some explanation of the phenomenon.

5. Recommendations and possible farmer strategies for the protection and defense of the

smale-scale producers’ interests.

6. The difficropies/challenges encountered and strategies to overcome them.

II. PRESENTATION OF THE NORTH KIVU PROVINCE.

A. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATION.

1.1. Area: 59631 Km2.

1.2. Administrative subdivision: 6 territories, 3 towns, 10 urban communes, 17

chiefdoms, 97 groupings, 52 quartiers and 5 cities.

- Towns: Goma, Butembo and Beni.

- Territories: Beni, Lubero, Rutshuru, Masisi, Walikale and Nyiragongo.

1.3. Population estimate: 7.600.000 people as of 2010.

1.4. Density: about 130 inhabitants per Km2.

1.5. Density of arable land: more than 300 inhabitants per Km2.

1.6.Limits :

- North: Western Province.

- South: South Kivu Province.

- West: Rwanda and Uganda.

- West: Maniema Province.

The following tables give details on administrative sub-divisions: sources: North Kivu

Monographe.

6 | P a g e

Table n° 1. Goma town: Headquaters of the province.

Communes. Area. (Km2) Population density. Locality.

GOMA 33,45 2.860,6 1. Katindo

2. Keshero

3. Volcan

4. Mikeno

5. Lac Vert

6. Mont Goma.

KARISIMBI 42,27 2.203 1. Kahembe

2. Katoyi

3. Majengo

4. Mabanga

5. Murara

6. Ndosho

7. Mugunga

Table n° 2 : Butembo town :

Communes. Area. (Km2) Density Locality

BULENGERA 55,18 1. Mutiri

2. Kimbulu

3. Mukuna

4. Kamesi Mgoodzo

5. Rughenda

6. Kyaghala

7. Wayene

8. Kalemire

KIMEMI 42,25 1. Commercial

2. Biondi

3. Lumumba

4. Bwinyole

5. Vutetse.

6. Ngengere.

7. Vutsundo

8. Malende

MUSUSA 40,3 1. Vungi

2. Kitulu

3. Matanda

4. Katwa.

5. Bwiningo.

6. Ngingi.

7. Vghole.

VULAMBA 52,61 1. Kambali

2. Matembe

3. Mukalangira

4. Congo ya Sika.

7 | P a g e

Table n° 3: Beni town.

COMMUNES AREA (Km2) Population Density Locality

BUNGULU 13,5 N.R

RWENZORI 14 N.R

BEU 15 N.R

MULEKERA 13 N.R

TOTAL 55 82

- The total population of Beni is estimated to be 450000 people.

Table n° 4. Territories, towns and communities.

TERRITORIES Area in Km2 TOWNS AND

COLLECTIVITES

Area in Km2

BENI 7484 1. Oicha town

2. Col. Bashu

3. Col. Beni-Mbau

4. Col. Rwenzori

5. Col. Watalinga

1. 93

2. 1.754

3. 2.589

4. 2.496.

5. 610.

LUBERO 18.096 1. Cité de Kirumba.

2. Cité de Kayna

3. Cité de Kanyabayonga

4. Col. de Baswagha

5. Col. de Bapere

6. Col. de Bamate.

7. Col. de Batangi.

1. 5

2. 8

3. 9

4. 3.640

5. 8.872

6. 1.776

7. 3.786

RUTSHURU 5.289 1. Cité de Kiwandja.

2. Col. de Bwisha

3. Col. de Bwito

1. 30

2. 2.709.

3. 2.550

MASISI 4.744 1. Col. de Bahunde

2. Col. de Bashali

3. Col. de Osso.

4. Col. de Katoyi.

1. 1.455

2. 1.510

3. 1.449

4. 330

WALIKALE 23.475 1. Col. de Bakano

2. Col. de Wanianga

1. 4.238

2. 19.237

NYIRAGONGO 333 1. Col. de Bakumu 1. 333

SOURCE: Preparatory work for the national consultation workshop on rural and agricropural

development in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Terms of Reference for North Kivu

province.

NYIRAGONGO is the smallest territory with an area of 333 Km2 which is 0,27% of the total

area of the province. WALIKALE is the largest territory with an area of 23.475 Km2 being

39,46 % of the total area of the province.

Even if we did not access recent data, the available documentation shows that the smallest

density in the province is in Bapere in Lubero territory followed by Wanianga in Walikale

territory.

Table n° 5 : distribution of land per territory.

N° Territory Total Area of % No of Mean area

8 | P a g e

area rural

land in

Km2

localities/villages per

locality/Km2

1. BENI 7484 4362 58 145 50,7

2. LUBERO 18096 18047 99 174 104

3. RUTSHURU 5289 5259 99,4 111 48

4. MASISI 4744 4704 99 96 49

5. WALIKALE 23475 23475 100 90 260

6. NYIRAGONGO 163 163 100 54 9

Source: Provincial division plan of North-Kivu.

The following comes out clearly from this table:

The North-Kivu province is predominantly rural. It is only Beni territory that has a large

proportion of urban land. This is due mainly to the fact that many farms are owned by former

colonialists. This is therefore the case since colonial times. See the table below.

Moreover, the locality with the small average size per locality is found in NYIRAGONGO

whereas WALIKALE has more than 250KM2

per locality.

B. PRESENTATION OF THE LAND ADMINISTRATION PLAN.

North-Kivu province is devided into the following 7 land constituencies.

1. Goma: covers Goma town the headquarters of the province.

2. Butembo: covers the town of Butembo and the chiefdoms/collectivities of Baswagha,

Bapere in Lubero and Bashu in Beni.

3. Kayna: covers Bamate Batangi collectivities.

4. Rutshuru: Covers Rutshuru territory.

5. Masisi: covers Masisi territory.

6. Oicha: covers Beni Mbau, Watalinga, and Rwenzori.

7. Beni: covers Beni town.

The province’s coverage in land services is still inadequate in that the cities/towns of Goma,

Butembo and Beni are the only ones close to the services.

Table n° 5 : Area land coverage:

N° DISTRICT ENTITY COVERED AREA

Km2

TOTAL

POPULATION.

1. Goma Goma town 75,72

TOTAL AREA 75,72

2. Butembo Butembo town 190,7

Bapere community 8.872

Baswagha community 3.640 493.347

Bashu community 1.754

TOTAL AREA 14.456

3. KAYNA Bamate community 1.776 324.088

Batangi community 3.786

Kirumba town 5

Kayna town 8

Kanyabayonga town 9

TOTAL AREA 5.584

9 | P a g e

4. Rutshuru Territoire de Rutshuru 5.259

Kiwandja town 30

TOTAL AREA 5.289

5. Masisi Masisi territory 4.744 366.680+

BASHALI

TOTAL AREA 4.744

6. Oicha Oicha town 93

Beni-Mbau community 2.589

Rwenzori community 2.496

Watalinga community 610

TOTAL AREA 5788

7. Beni Beni town 58

TOTAL AREA 58

This table clearly shows that land services cover very large areas and therefore,

their geographical accessibility remains a problem especially for rural populations. In fact,

there are great distances for these people to get to the offices of the various land divisions.

The smaller districts are: Beni: 58 Km2, Goma: 75.72Km

2 respectively.

The whole territory of Masisi has only one land division and Rutshuru has two.

Moreover, the largest constituency/district is Butembo with 14,456km2, more than half of

Burundi.

In addition, the province of North Kivu, is itself larger than Rwanda and Burundi put

together totaling 51,000Km2 against 59,631km

2 of North Kivu.

III. OCCUPATION OF RURAL LAND IN NORTH KIVU PROVINCE.

For this chapter, we present results from the study carried out on the ground on the land use

by farmers and large planters.

These data were enriched by information collected in different documents available at the

agricropural services offices at the provincial and terrirorial level.

10 | P a g e

III.1. LIST OF PLANTATIONS IN NORTH-KIVU

1. TERRITOIRE DE LUBERO

N°

NAME OF

LANTATION LOCATION FORMER OWNER

NAME OF

ACQUIRER OCCUPATION TITLE

TOTAL

Hect. AREA in value SPECULATION OBSERVATION

1 VUGOGHO Kanyabayonga Bouher Arnold Mwigha Masinda Cert. Of ownership 50 40 coffee

10ha taken by the

town

2 MIKUTA Bulotwa Danly Hirlem Pandele Sh Cert. Of ownership 64 50 quinquina

9ha of quinquina

and food crop

3 BULOTWA Bulotwa Clignet Kyamakya Marc Allotment letter 200 coffee

Inhabited + food

crop

4 BULENGERA Bulengera Joye Alberic Muhindo K Request for land 100 14 coffee

concession en conf

5 NDEREMBI Nderembi Joye Daniel Kambale M Request for land 100 8 coffee Food crops

6 ITALA Itala Du Bois Kambale M Request for land 100 3 cassava

Insufficient land for

exploitation

7 KINYONDO Kinyondo Albale Trier Kahindo Map Certificate 73 13 coffee + quinquina

8 BWALEYRE Kayna Prud'homme Muratusi K Contract 100 4 coffee population

9 KAYNA Kayna Vanos Mungumwa Kas Contract 73 15 coffee taken by the town

10 KAHURU II Kayna Froidmond Katsuva Tay Request for land 100 coffee Not maintained

11 KAHURU I Kayna Sierge du Bois Kambere Mule Allotment letter 50 30 coffee not maintained

12 KASANDO Kasando Gouvea Kambere Mule Certificate 284 34 coffee + quinquina plus food crop

13 KISUYI Kayna Dupont Louis Katsongo M Certificate 50 31 coffee not maintained

14 IVATAMA Kayna Arban André Kioma Wandi Certificate 100 60 coffee not maintained

15 MKAMUMBA Kayna Michel Paluku Luhotwa Certificate 100 12 coffee not maintained

16 MULIRAMO Kayna Nick Albert SOLPOKI 54 20 coffee not maintained

17 KAKOVERO

Bloc

Lwangongo Marchal Van L Kasereka Luv Contract 101 50 coffee not maintained

18 TUVALI Musienene De Buldeling Kakule Kal Contract 202 tea In conflict

11 | P a g e

19 KYAVIKERE Mageria Van Over Berg Kasereka Luv Allotment letter 50 50 coffee + quinquina Tea factory

20 VUKEKEMA Luotu Van Doorken Katsuva Kirivutsi 3 3 coffee coffee+food crop

21 KAVALE Musienene Van Over Berg Magateso tea + afforestation

22 KAVETYA Muhangi Van Stan Kiste Mathe + Katimba Allotment letter 68 40 coffee

23 TOMU Biambwe Garles Robert Kasereka sivi Allotment letter 100 coffee robusta

24 MULENDU Mabambi Hambert Lucien Mahamba vyakera Request for land 100 5 coffee

25 NDEKO Mabambi Gyemberg Paluku Kaghe contract 90 40 coffee

26 NGONGI Mabambi Gyemberg Mumbere Muh Request for land 30 30 Food crop

27 KAVALI/LUBERO Lubero Brossens Kambale Viso certificate 100 30 Food crop

28 KIVIKA Kimbulu Martens Mukeleghe contract 25 25 quinquina

29 MULUNDI I Mabambi Van Gasse Paluku Lolwako certificate 115 11 coffee+ Food crop

30 MULUNDI II Mabambi Gysemberg Katembo Vuma contract 32 32 coffee

31 KITOVO Muhangi Dejager Makembe Kindoho contract 50 46 coffee

32 KHIMA Katolo Hannape Maunga Kimbute contract 29 20 afforestation

33 KAVALI/LUBERO Musienene Baby Alfred Magateso contract 28 10 quinquina

34 KAVANDA I ET II Kyambogho Gregorien Kambere Kyas contract 37 37 Afforestation Food crop +reafforestation

35 NGOLOBWE Kyambogho Davidopoules K Bindo contract 28 28 afforestation

36 KALEGHA Mabambi Van Cupsen COOFICO Butembo 120 5 quinquina

37 MALENDE Malende Van Daele Rubindo lusi 21 20 quinquina+afforestation

38 MALENDE Malende Liane Victor Kahindo Ndekesisri 10 10 afforestation

2937 789

2. NYIRAGONGO TERRITORY

1 NYAKABANDA Nyakabanda Liesson Gatariki Ntwali Acte de cession 20 20 afforestation+ Food crop not maintained

2 JOLI BOIS Byahi Clevaux Banzira n°52/7 34 34 afforestation+ Food crop not maintained

3 BAHA II Byahi Geens Buzigiye contract 23 23 afforestation+ Food crop not maintained

77 77

3. WALIKALE TERRITORY

1 HOMBO Hombo Van de Walleg Mme Mahamba Allotment N°600 300 300 Oil palm maintained

2 KILAMBO Kilambo Rochus Léon Soda Shani Allotment N°2278 85 80 coffee robusta maintained

3 MUTOYO Mutoyo Van Dorpe Okenge Allotment N°2276 60 60 coffee robusta maintained

4 KITATENDE Kitatenge Van Weteer Kibira Katarungu Allotment N°2276 300 300 coffee robusta maintained

12 | P a g e

5 NDIPO I Ndipo Stielties W Lihau 50 50 coffee robusta maintained

6 NDIPO II Ndipo Stielties Roberto Lihau 50 50 coffee robusta maintained

7 MILUNGU Milungu Schietekala 11 11 coffee robusta maintained

8 TCHAMAKA Tchamaka Lemaire jules Ets OSAKOWALO 198 45 coffee robusta maintained

9 OSOKARI Osokari Thelmissen A Ets KIMA 95 35 coffee robusta maintained

10 LUGO (WASSA) Logu (Wassa) Latinis 7 7 coffee robusta

Maintained

11 Kanga Van Ecknaut Shemakuru 50 50 coffee robusta maintained

12 NGORA Ngora Fauconnier Kibira Katarungu Allotment N°227725 25 25 coffee robusta maintained

13 IHULA Ihula Renard 605 6,5 tea Not maintained

14 KAMISUKU Kamisuku Brainbant j, 20 Oil palm + coffee maintained

15 RUHENZI Ruhenzi Bex Butu Biandimeno 30 30 coffee robusta maintained

16 ILUNGA Ilunga Rochus Léon Lwamiango 15 10 Oil palm maintained

17 NDIPPO III Ndipo Stieljes A. 50 50 coffee robusta maintained

18 DJEMBE Kitatenge Matelaer J. Ets KIMA 275 coffee robusta maintained

19 KITIMBATIMBA Kitimbatimba Latinis Ets KIMA 50 15 coffee robusta maintained

20 OSOKARI Osokari Brainbant j, Ets OSAKO WALO 20 20 coffee robusta maintained

2296

4. MASISI TERRITORY

1 THEKI NYABIONDO Nyabiondo Duprez Mwananteba 1000 550 tea, reafforestation, crop

2 KISHENGO THEKI KITU Kitu Mahanga Herman Population 78 178 tea, crop

3 MAHANGA Mahanga Duprez Mwananteba 582 375 tea, crop

4 LOASHI Loashi Cauwe Ngezayo K 319 284 tea, crop, reafforestation

5 BUHENDA Buhenda Cauwe Kanunga Ruti 600 350 tea, crop, reafforestation

6 KIMOO Kimoo Herman Baeni 300 280 crop

7 NDANDU Ndandu Antoine Kitsa Kitambala 89 89 crop, reafforestation

8 NYANGE Nyange Cauwe Muhima 190 180 tea, crop, reafforestation

9 NGURU Nguru Deprez Nzamukwereka 86 86 tea, crop

10 NYABURA Nyabura Laurent Kasuku wa Ngeo 600 tea, crop

11 SALM-BIN-SALM Nyabura Verlaet Salm-bin-Salm 50 50 crop

12 KALEMBE Kalembe Naleonry Fataki 50 58 crop

13 KALEMBE Kalembe Muhima K Fataki 50 50 crop

14 MULIHO Muliho Tassin Hern Kasuku wa Ngeo 120 120 tea, crop

15 MIHARA Mihara Van Den Dael Mutoo Murayiri 100 75 tea, crop

13 | P a g e

16 NGURU Nguru Cuyt Camil Nzamukwereka 50 50 tea, crop

17 MUHANGA LUK Muhanga Veri Houts Rwakineza 52 52 tea, crop

18 KIPFUMWE Kipfumwe Grelle Léen Rwakineza 127 127 tea, crop

19 KIHIMBA Kihimba Van Der Weekf Mbiyirwa 143 127 tea, crop

20 KIHIMBA Kihimba Dewittiyou Bisukiro 14 tea, crop

21 KAHIRA Kahira Fievettean Bisukiro 38 tea, crop

22 NGURU Nguru Gerris Ferdinand Salumu 50 tea, crop

23 KAHIRA Kahira Sydenjean Habimana 82 tea, crop

24 KASHASHA Kashasha Bucherotto Habimana 39 tea, crop

25 LUKULU Lukulu Bormyears Farm Espérance 92 tea, crop

26 NGURU Nguru Guytcamil Nzamukwereka 50 tea, crop

27 NGURU Nguru Guytcamil Habimana 50 tea, crop

28 MIHARA Minanga Delabie Nzamukwereka 70 tea, crop

29 MWESO Mweso Van Slemboruoc Hangi tea, crop

30 RUSINCHA Rusincha Van Nayeurachi Bashali Mokoto tea, crop

31 SHASHA Shasha Brakan Munyandutiye 119 100 coffee trees, crop

32 KITUMBILI Kitumbili Deroche Salumu 85 coffee trees, crop

33 NGUMBA Ngumba Plumier Salumu 168 coffee trees, crop

34 BWAMBALIRO Bwambaliro Brotheren Ruyange 160 coffee trees, crop

35 KISHAKA Kishaka Chrystchoscours Madimba 70 coffee trees, crop

36 LUSHANGI Lushangi Chrystchoscours Kibira Katarungu 300 coffee trees, crop

37 KIULI Kiuli Marchal Madimba 400 coffee trees, crop

38 LUHONGA Luhonga Jetta Mukendi 300 coffee trees, crop

39 BWINCHA Bwincha Dulet Willam 31 coffee trees, crop

40 MUGANDO Mugando Marchal Nyota 30 coffee trees, crop

41 KIMOKA Kimoka Bresky Hangi Masikini 30 coffee trees, crop

42 CADUKI/UDKE Caduki Chrystchoscours Kibira Katarungu 200 coffee trees, crop

43 KECO-LUINDI Luindi Ritiwegor Kimbwa 410 quinquina

44 KOBE Kobe Chrystchoscours Kibira Katarungu 50 coffee trees, crop

45 MINDI Mindi Descoth Tussi 190 crop, reafforestation

46 NGWIRO Ngwiro Descoth Population 100 crop, fishfarming

47 MUKOHWA Mukohwa Rombeau Bakungu Phuna 30 crop

48 NGUMBA Ngumba Vend Ven Mirimo 14 crop

14 | P a g e

49 KIPFUMU Kipfumu CNKI block Bakungu Mayao 112 crop

50 KIPFUMU Kipfumu CNKI block Bakungu Kalwy 112 crop

51 NYANGE Nyange CNKI block Muhima 120 crop

52 MUKOHWA Mukohwa Rombeau Bakungo Phuna 15 crop

53 NGEREKO Ngereko CNKI block Baramisi Crop

54 KIPFUMU Kipfumu CNKI block Population 120 crop

8237

5. BENI TERRITORY

1 MANGODOMU MANGODOMU Baddy Alfred Lutu Luwanya 93 93 Food crops in cleanup

2 KYATSABA KYATSABA Drapier Kasereka Matemuli 179 179 Food crops in cleanup

3 NZUKI NZUKI Imerie et Lale CAPACO 68 68 food crops in cleanup

4 MBOSO MBOSO Cibrario CAPACO 40 40 food crops in cleanup

5 BINGO BINGO Jacques Kahindo Ndekesiri 500 500 food crops in cleanup

6 BINGO BINGO Paluku Sivirwa Ngba Mwana 80 80 food crops in cleanup

7 BINGO BINGO Desiron Mambo 125 125 food crops in cleanup

8 MANGANGO MANGANGO Maio de Souze Noguetra et cie 600 600 food crops in cleanup

9 MANGANGO MANGANGO Odysse Os André PLANOKI 186 186 food crops in cleanup

10 MANGANGO MANGANGO Odysse Os André PLANOKI 95 95 food crops in cleanup

11 LUWOLA LUWOLA Odysse Os André PLANOKI 100 100 food crops in cleanup

12 NGITE NGITE Odysse Os André PLANOKI 100 100 food crops in cleanup

13 NAMIKI NAMIKI Odysse Os André PLANOKI 100 100 food crops in cleanup

14 MATABI MATABI Odysse Os André PLANOKI 100 100 food crops in cleanup

15 MANGANGO MANGANGO Kissing Momene Mo M 3 3 food crops in cleanup

16 MANGANGO MANGANGO Piters Fernando Momene Mo M 100 100 food crops in cleanup

17 TABIE TABIE Thubaut Hubert Katembo Mbanga 100 100 food crops in cleanup

18 TABIE TABIE Van Boie Gahunga Ruti 100 100 food crops in cleanup

19 MANGANGO MANGANGO Bousman Léopold Chimanuka 55 55 food crops in cleanup

20 NYALEKE NYALEKE Nerinks Kambale Machozi 68 68 food crops in cleanup

21 TABIE TABIE Matarangas Kalinda Rukisi 127 127 food crops in cleanup

22 MUNDUBIENA MUNDUBIENA Paluku Sivirwa Ngba Mwana 80 80 food crops in cleanup

23 MANGANGO MANGANGO Kura Sulemani Ngba Mwana 50 50 food crops in cleanup

24 MAVIVI MAVIVI Zaphrakis SOZADECHANGES 160 160 food crops in cleanup

15 | P a g e

25 ANDELEA ANDELEA Lurkin Félicien Amisi 50 50 food crops

Became Maba

village

26 ANDELEA ANDELEA Merner Guy Amisi 50 50 food crops in cleanup

27 LUBENA LUBENA Butten Fryears Amisi 75 75 food crops in cleanup

28 MALONDO MALONDO Pirard Saleh Bin Saleh 50 50 food crops in cleanup

29 LUHULE LUHULE Van Ancker Lievin Saleh Bin Saleh 100 100 food crops in cleanup

30 INGOBO INGOBO Van Roie Ntite TshiEnda 50 50 food crops in cleanup

31 MAY MOYA MAY MOYA Maio de Souze CUGEKI/Butembo 100 100 food crops in cleanup

32 TUNGUDU TUNGUDU Ophoven Anguwandia Diunu 125 25 Oil palm vieux palmiers

33 MAMBUNE MAMBUNE Gregorio Kasereka Mukand 75,34 food crops in cleanup

34 MALIOBA MALIOBA Jaumin et Van Roie Kakule Kyoghero 100 100 Oil palm, food crops in cleanup

35 KATWAKAVANI

KATWAKAVA

NI Jaumin et Van Roie Muhindo Kyuma 256 food crops in cleanup

36 DUDUANZI DUDUANZI jaumin et Van Roie Muhindo Kyuma 2 2 food crops in cleanup

37 MAMBOLIO MAMBOLIO Michel Ernest Kapitula 75 75 food crops in cleanup

38 KONGOLI KIMA KONGOLI KIMA CNKI block Mumbere Ndianabo 272 food crops in cleanup

39 MAMBUNE MAMBUNE Jaumin Marcel Kyoma Malikidogo 71 food crops in cleanup

40 LUHULE LUHULE Sweron Maître Ghiofa 75 75 food crops in cleanup

41 BLOC KISANGANI Sweron Maître Ghiofa 182 food crops population

42 TABI TABI Van Ardes Rutanuka 100 100 food crops population

43 MANZAMUNDO MANZAMUNDO CNKI block Van Hoof Louis 84 84 food crops population

44 MADIWE KIBWE MADIWE KIBWE CNKI block Van Hoof Louis 100 100 food crops population

45 ALOYA MADIWE ALOYA MADIWE CNKI block Van Hoof Louis 90 90 food crops population

46 MAMBENA MAMBENA CNKI block Kasereka Kasi 400 400 food crops population

47 MANZAMUNDO

MANZAMUND

O CNKI block Katembo Vuma 100 100 food crops population

48 MANZAMUNDO

MANZAMUND

O Pierrard Katembo Vuma 120 120 food crops population

49 MASANGI MASANGI Pierrard Kayembe Manda 65 food crops population

50 MALONDO MALONDO Lagière Claude Kayembe Manda 50 50 food crops population

51 MALONDO MALONDO CNKI block Kayembe Manda 50 50 food crops population

52 TABI TABI CNKI block Millor Roger 131 131 food crops population



55 TABI TABI CNKI block Millor Roger 78 food crops population

16 | P a g e

56 LUHULE MADIWE LUHULE MADIWE CNKI block Pick Bing Marc 125 food crops population

57 LUHULE MADIWE LUHULE MADIWE CNKI block Pick Bing Marc 114 114 food crops population

58 LUHULE MADIWE LUHULE MADIWE CNKI block Pick Bing Marc 100 100 food crops population

6802

6. RUTSHURU TERRITORY

1 NYABIKORO gpt Jomba Baeten Ndemeye 21 18 Quinquina maintained

2 NYAKARIBA gpt Jomba Kambale Ndemeye 48 7 Quinquina maintained

3 KALENGE gpt Jomba Quinet Rwakabuba 48 Quinquina maintained

4 TSHENGERE I gpt Jomba PHARMAKINA PHARMAKINA 190 110 Quinquina maintained

5 TSHENGERE II gpt Jomba Bertholet Bishogoro 52 Quinquina maintained

6 RUBAHIRA gpt Busanza Henri Munyatwari 132 20 Coffee arabica maintained

7 RWAMPISI gpt Busanza Vano Araut Nyiringabo 95 5 Coffee arabica maintained

8 LUBIRIZI gpt Busanza Jamar G NdezeIrivuzumwami 211 15 Coffee arabica maintained

9 BAHUGA gpt Busanza Gustine Gustine 150 Coffee arabica maintained

10 PUNGA gpt Busanza Tulken Gerard Kijibwami 202 15 coffee arab+ food crops maintained

11 RWANYANI gpt Busanza Vengetines Bahizi Kabunga 259 3 coffee arab+ food crops maintained

12 RUGARAMA gpt Busanza Lebrun Sembemba maintained

13 KANYAMAGANA gpt Busanza Lebrun Midiburo 150 6 coffee rob+food crops

Maintained

14 MUGOGO gpt Busanza Bavay Bavay 65 11 coffee rob+ food crops maintained

15 KATIKINYANGE gpt Busanza Lays Sekabuhoro 52 coffee rob+ food crops maintained

16 BUGANI II gpt Bweza N°1 Genrani Ntamashakiro 54 52 coffee trees maintained

17 KASEKE gpt Bweza Mares Gaukha Baderabusha 45 30 coffee trees maintained

18 MBIGO gpt Bweza Schimit Charles Schinit Charles 250 18,5 Quinquina maintained

19 RWAREMA gpt Bweza Comelliaux PHARMAKINA Quinquina maintained

20 BUBANGA gpt Bweza CMC/RWAKABUBA CMC/RWAKABUBA 27 Factory+coffee arab Good

MUHANGA gpt Bweza Colsen Trees Domaine de Katale 50 50 coffee arabica Good

21 RUSEKE gpt Bweza Ricohillario Aza Obito 55 coffee arabica+food crops Good

22 KAHUNGA gpt Bukoma Galvatas Nzanzu Kirarahumu 98 coffee+palm tree Good

23 KAHUNGA gpt Bukoma Tomson Kambale 26 coffee trees

24 KAYIBOSHERA gpt Bukoma Lera Constantin Kambale Tshumb 25

25 MAIBO KAHUNGA gpt Bukoma Daniz

26 KAHUNGA gpt Bukoma M, Orry Kalonga Tsisera 100 coffee trees

17 | P a g e

27 KINYANDONYI gpt Bukoma Lebrun Semey Ryamukuru 500 coffee trees

28 BUSEPENGENYI gpt Bukoma Carnien Bizimana Ndungutse 300 coffee trees

29 NYABIKWANGA gpt Bukoma Besabele Mukubanya 100

30 KANYABUSEKE gpt Bukoma Stingi Lambe Ruz Mr Remis 87

31 KAGARAT gpt Bukoma Gikoriki Rukoriki 735

32 KATORO gpt Bukoma Emile Besad Rukoriki 100

33 KANYAMONDO gpt Bukoma Corbisier Bisukiro 150

34 KISISILE gpt Bukoma Van Over Berg Domaine de Katale 143,6

35 KALEHE gpt Bukoma Debrun Domaine de Katale 250

36 NIONGERA II gpt Bukoma Michel Maro Domaine de Katale 100

37 NIONGERA III gpt Bukoma Gallaux Domaine de Katale 100

38 NIONGERA I gpt Bukoma Remy Domaine de Katale 101

39 KARAMBI gpt Bukoma Etienne Paul Domaine de Katale 63

40 BUGABO II gpt Bukoma Dhagos Ruz Mr Remis 82 coffee arabica

41 BUGABO I gpt Bukoma De Veillis Ngezayo Kambale 81

42 RWABIZO gpt Bukoma Salvi Salvo Femme Bahizi 42,5

43 KIBUTUTU gpt Bukoma CNKI block Ruz Mr Remis 80

44 MUNANIRA gpt Bukoma Derry Jean Ndeze Ndabizi 6,12 Pasture

45 MAY-YA-IVI gpt Bukoma Recoriel Kayitenkore 100 24 Banana trees

46 KATWIGURU II gpt Binza Thomson Pierre Esembe 100

47 MUZINGA gpt Binza Bahizi Bahizi Kabunga 100 coffee robusta

48 KATWIGURU III gpt Binza Leis Patrice 100 coffee robusta

49 MUSUMBA I gpt Binza De Lancer Kambere 100 coffee robusta

50 MUSUMBA II gpt Binza Baudart Tsongo 50 12 coffee robusta

51 MURAMBI I gpt Binza Baudart Long Okitora 50 15 coffee robusta

52 MURAMBI II gpt Binza Salvi Salvo Mukendi Mbuyi 50 5 coffee robusta

53 KAKWALE gpt Binza Mangat Le Jong Jean 115 15 coffee robusta

54 KASABABANDA gpt Binza Bertholet 100 coffee robusta

55 BURAMBA gpt Binza Manigini Ndabishonoye 150 5 coffee+palm trees

56 NYAMILIMA gpt Binza Thomson Pierre Eglise Catholique 100

57 KATALE qpt Kisigari Van de Vivere Domaine de Katale 451 NR coffee robusta

58 BILUMA qpt Kisigari Van de Vivere Domaine de Katale 500 NR coffee robusta

59 RWANKI qpt Kisigari Van Quen Berche Domaine de Katale 21 19 coffee robusta

60 NYABIKERE qpt Kisigari Van Quen Berche Domaine de Katale 186 NR coffee robusta

18 | P a g e

61 NYAKAGEZI qpt Kisigari Diner Domaine de Katale 135 NR coffee robusta

62 KITERANA qpt Kisigari Cavalli Domaine de Katale 61 NR coffee robusta

63 NYAKAGEZI qpt Kisigari De Brun Domaine de Katale 20 NR coffee robusta

64 KALENGERA qpt Kisigari Cavalli Domaine de Katale 228 60 coffee arabica Very good

65 KIGARAMA qpt Kisigari Rigon Freres Domaine de Katale 82 48 coffee arabica Very good

66 BUBANGA qpt Kisigari De Meuten Domaine de Katale 45 25 coffee arabica Very good

67 RUBARE qpt Kisigari 172 70 coffee arabica Very good

68 RUBARE qpt Kisigari Very good

69 KABANO qpt Kisigari Van Over Berg Domaine de Katale 48 NR coffee arabica Very good

70 ISHULO MATEBE qpt Kisigari Boel Domaine de Katale 230 NR coffee arabica Very good

71 HANGI qpt Kisigari Huwart Domaine de Katale 95 60 coffee arabica Very good

72 HANGI KIRWA qpt Kisigari Van Destein Domaine de Katale 12 8,5 coffee arabica Very good

73 BUGANI qpt Kisigari D'Anethan Domaine de Katale 51 NR coffee arabica Very good

74 KIVUNGA qpt Kisigari Donaert Franc Ndabishoboye 234 120 coffee arabica Very good

75 TSHIMA qpt Kisigari Donaert Franc Ndabishoboye 60 45 coffee arabica Very good

76 ISHASHAZA qpt Kisigari Donaert Franc Ndabishoboye 100 30 coffee arabica Very good

77 KABASENGO qpt Kisigari Sperembehie Renzaho 100 30 coffee arabica Very good

78 NYAMUHENDO qpt Kisigari Martin Rwakabuba 240 240 coffee arabica Very good

79 LUTIBA gpt Bukombo Intrever Ntindamahina 70 38

80 LUTIBA gpt Bukombo Custine Nicole Custine Nicole 50 44

81 LUTIBA gpt Bukombo Engeles Judo Habangira 96 15

82 MBUSUBUSU gpt Bukombo De Ruyck Kalinda 75 15

83 LUTIBA gpt Bukombo Versstrante Kalinda 50 40

84 NGESHO/LUTIBA gpt Bukombo Versstrante Kalinda 49,75 28,8

85 NGESHO/LUTIBA gpt Bukombo Staclens Sebatware 43 24

86 FUBWE gpt Bukombo Bucquet Aliliwali 50 19

87 KUWEBA gpt Bukombo Manager Aliliwali

88 RUBWE gpt Bukombo Bora Foum Balingene

89 CHANURWA gpt Bukombo Dupont Lucien Mpuhwe

90 FUBWE gpt Bukombo Jean Paroisse de Biramb N.R. N.R. N.R.

91 KATSIRU gpt Bukombo Engeles Judo Nzasamba N.R. N.R. N.R.

92 KATSIRU gpt Bukombo Dahathan N.R. N.R. N.R.

93 KATSIRU gpt Bukombo Verbrunger Rutijana N.R N.R. N.R.

19 | P a g e

94 BULANDA gpt Bukombo Locat Rutijana N.R. N.R. N.R.

95 KYUMBA gpt Bukombo Bieles Rutijana N.R. N.R. N.R.

96 KYUMBA gpt Bukombo Bieles Rutijana N.R. N.R. N.R.

97 RUSHEBERE gpt Bukombo Maurice jean Rutijana N.R. N.R. N.R.

98 KATSIRU II gpt Bukombo Deloo Cysille Bauma N.R. N.R. N.R.

99 KATSIRU IV gpt Bukombo Verseesch Tshani N.R N.R. N.R.

100 KATSIRU III gpt Bukombo Mme Peeters Kamanzi N.R. N.R. N.R.

101 KATSIRU IV gpt Bukombo Mm de Witer R.N.D. N.R. N.R. N.R.

102 KATYAZO gpt Bukombo Orthmyears R.N.D. N.R. N.R. N.R.

103 MWESO/HONERO gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.

104 KATSIRA gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.

105 KATSIRA gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R N.R. N.R.

106 KATSIRA gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.

107 LUBATI gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.

108 LUBATI gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.

109 KAHE MARAIS gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.

110 MOHE II gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.

111 KIFUMBU gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R N.R. N.R.

112 MOHEIII gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.

113 MOHE I gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.

114 KIHONGA gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.

115 KIHONGA gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.

116 MUBIGO gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R N.R. N.R.

117 RUGIMBI I gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.

118 RUGIMBI gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.

119 GOODOBWA gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.

120 KAVUO gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.

121 KARAMBI gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.

122 KYAHEMBA gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R N.R. N.R.

123 HIFO gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.

124 NGORA gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.

125 NGESHO gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.

126 NGESHO gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.

127 KITWA KISHAM gpt Kihondo N.R. N.R N.R N.R. N.R.

20 | P a g e

128 MALAMA gpt Kihondo N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.

129 MOTO MOYA gpt Kihondo N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.

130 BUSIGHA gpt Kanyabayonga N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.

131 BITONGI I

gpt

Kanyabayonga N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.

132 KITIBITO gpt Kanyabayonga N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.

133

DESCHOUTTE

STE N.R. N.R N.R N.R. N.R.

134 NYANZALE gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.

135 BUSURURURU gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.

136 KINYATSI II gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.

137 IKALE gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.

138 gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R N.R. N.R.

139 gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.




143 RUSIGHA gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.

144 KABILANGIRIRO gpt Mutand N.R. N.R N.R N.R. N.R. .

145 KAHUKO gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.

146 KABATI II gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.

147 KABATI II gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.

148 KABATI MUTI gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.

149 MUSHEBESHEBE

gpt

Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. .

150 KYANGOMA gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.

151 MUTANDA I gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.

152 MUTANDA II gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R N.R. N.R.

153 KILIMA I gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.

154 KILIMA II gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.

155 KILIMA III gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.

156 KIBUNGU gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.

157 KALUMBIA gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.

21 | P a g e

III.2. LIST OF FARMS IN NORTH KIVU


N°

NAME OF THE

FARM LOCATION

FORMER

OWNER NAME OF ACQUIRER TITLE OF OCCUPATION

TOTAL

AREA

IN

VALUE SPECULATION OBSERVATION

1 ISHASHAZA gpt Binza Goodard Farncis Ndeze Ndabishobo 10030 Livestock rearing, caprins maintained

2 LUBWE SUD gpt Kihondo Plantinkx Buunda Birere 125 120 Livestock rearing, maintained

3 NGESHO gpt Bishusha Sapieha Adam Mwenenge Afamasa 189,5 111 Livestock rearing Not maintained

4 LUBATI gpt Bishusha Ghilain Jean Mwenenge Afamasa 109,7 103 Livestock rearing Not maintained

5 KINYATSI III gpt Kihondo

Mme Renard Van

PE Nzabakurukiza 68 35 Livestock rearing Maintained

6 KINYATSI III gpt Kihondo Van PEE EPS Nzabakurukiza 295 295 Livestock rearing maintained

7 LUBWE NORD gpt Kihondo GEER Roger CECUBWI 120 10 Livestock rearing maintained

8 KITWA KESH gpt Kihondo Mouche Pierre Semuchacha 110 60 Livestock rearing maintained

9 MUTU MOYA gpt Jomba Colle Etienne Kakule Kahita 228 8 Livestock rearing maintained

10 MUNZIRARWE gpt Jomba Dementen Musonerwa 15 15 Livestock rearing maintained

11 KINYANGURUBE gpt Jomba Dementen Musonerwa 15 15 Livestock rearing maintained

12 KAMIRA gpt Jomba Comellion Segihobe 74 74 Livestock rearing maintained

13 SINGA gpt Busanza Lebrun Rwamukuru 192 192 Livestock rearing maintained

14 RUGARAMA gpt Busanza Lebrun Sembeba Livestock rearing maintained

15 KANYAMAGANA III gpt Busanza Lebrun Kibiribiri 156 156 Livestock rearing maintained

16 CHIBUMBA GAHINGA gpt Bweza Gatsama 70 50 Livestock rearing maintained

17 KANYABUSORO gpt Bweza Trout Munyarubega 25 Livestock rearing maintained

18 BUREKEKENYE gpt Bukoma Renten Kibiribiri 156 Livestock rearing maintained

19 KATEMBA gpt Bukoma Salvio Salvo Ngezayo 81 81 Livestock rearing maintained

20 BUHIMBA gpt Bukoma De sa Delier Kasongo Shuyaka 65 65 Livestock rearing Not maintained

21 BUGINA gpt Bukoma Norfreel Kalombo 70 Livestock rearing Not maintained

22 KAHUNGA gpt Bukoma Kayuzi 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained

22 | P a g e

23 KATWIGURU I gpt Binza Van Nebrun Munyamihana 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained

24 BUMA gpt Binza Ackermas M Ndeze Irivuzumwami 100 100 Livestock rearing maintained

25 MUSUMBA II gpt Binza Steckers Mbeza Mihigo 67,5 60 Livestock rearing maintained

26 BINWABIKE/LUTIBA gpt Bukombo Verstraete Kalinda Sekwekwe 60 60 Livestock rearing maintained

27 MUHANGA gpt Bukombo Van de Halle Kibingi 101 30 Livestock rearing maintained

28 KANYABUBUNGA gpt Bukombo Van de Halle Mukama 50 35 Livestock rearing maintained

29 LUTIBA gpt Bukombo Windey Lucien Kabuyaya 85,87 30 Livestock rearing maintained

30 BINWABIRE I gpt Bukombo Verbrungen Ndebereya 58 Livestock rearing maintained

31 BINWABIRE I gpt Bukombo Van de kels Chiza Muhigirwa 50 40 Livestock rearing maintained

32 LUTIBA gpt Bukombo Brouskavet Chiza Moromoro 50 47 Livestock rearing maintained

33 LUTIBA gpt Bukombo Deschyver Paroisse Birambizo 64 35ha Livestock rearing maintained

34 KATSIRU I gpt Bukombo Verbrungen Rutijana sebahire 20 20 Livestock rearing maintained

35 KYUMBA gpt Bukombo Bielies Rutijana sebahire 35 35 Livestock rearing maintained

36 KATSIRU III gpt Bukombo Pelters Kamanzi 50 30 Livestock rearing maintained

37 REMERA I gpt Kihondo Kaberuka Kaberuka 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained

38 KIHONGA gpt Kihondo Bielies Kaberuka 200 Livestock rearing maintained

39 NYABINO II gpt Mutanda Deschoutteste Shika Higiro 118 60 Livestock rearing maintained

40 MUSHIKIRI I gpt Mutanda Jumer Gatanazi 123 70 Livestock rearing maintained

41 MUSHIKIRI II gpt Mutanda Stekers Rwigema 262 50 Livestock rearing maintained

42 BIRISHEKE gpt Mutanda Praie Jules Mbishibishi 246 98 Livestock rearing maintained

43 KATWE KITOBOLO gpt Mutanda Staclers Michel Buunda Birere 80 38 Livestock rearing maintained

44 50 30 Livestock rearing maintained

45

46 KAGUO gpt Bishusha Drion Duchapos Nzabakurikiza 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained

47 KIRURUMA gpt Kihondo Kaberuka Kaberuka 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained

48 IBAMBE IBAMBE

Service

véterinaire Wambugha 259 Livestock rearing maintained

49 KABARUNDI KABARUNDI Drion Duchapos Nzabakurikiza 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained

50 NYAMIRAMIRWA NYAMIRAMIRWA Comeliau Segihobe 74 maintained

51 KITUNDA gpt Kihondo Goodne André Majabo 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained

52 LUNGA Lunga Blon Del Jean Rév Sehene 47 47 Livestock rearing maintained

53 LUBWE NORD Lubwe Roger Ogez Gecubwi 80 88 Livestock rearing maintained

TOTAL RUTSHURU 4944,57

2. BENI TERRITORY

23 | P a g e

1 LUMETALYA LUMETALYA Engelen Van Hoof 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained

2 MGOODAYA MGOODAYA Ingels SODAIR 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained

3 MIHUNGA MIHUNGA Ingels SODAIR 170 170 Livestock rearing maintained

4 KYAVISALE KYAVISALE Debremacker Paluku Mutogherwa 99 99 Livestock rearing maintained

5 LWAMISO I LWAMISO I Seneque Paluku Nzoumwa 18 18 Livestock rearing maintained

6 MUHORARO MUHORARO Ingels Ngeleza 150 150 Livestock rearing maintained

7 KANYATSI KANYATSI Mr et Mme Galas Katsuva 18 18 Livestock rearing maintained

8 KILIA KILIA/Mutwanga SODAIR 126,5 126,5 Livestock rearing maintained

9 BIAKOVE BIAKOVE Userding Sivaheswa 100 100 Livestock rearing maintained

10 MAPATA MAPATA Cossee se Sem Colyphtone 100 100 Livestock rearing maintained

11 SULA Bloc SULA Jaumin Marcel Goodabana 34 34 Livestock rearing maintained

12 SULA Bloc SULA De Borggrave Goodabana 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained

13 MILIMA MILIMA Lortie Joel N’Sele 250 250 Livestock rearing maintained

14 KARIMUMBA KARIMUMBA Lortie Joel Kasonia 435 435 Livestock rearing maintained

15 BUNTORA BUNTORA Siroux Fernard Kambale 28 28 Livestock rearing maintained

16 MAVONO MAVONO Lafont Pierre Kahindo Kaviti 36 36 Livestock rearing maintained

17 VUNERERE VUNERERE Bourgs Charles Katunda 14 14 Livestock rearing maintained

18 MOLA MOLA Userding Kakule 35 35 Livestock rearing maintained

19 LUHULE LUHULE Mme Hallin Kayiyembako 15 15 Livestock rearing maintained

20 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained

21 SULA Bloc SULA Thirat Hubert Shabantu Kimayi 120 120 Livestock rearing maintained

22 SULA Bloc SULA Deslahaut J Shabantu Kimayi 25 25 Livestock rearing maintained

23 SULA Bloc SULA Crucitix Shabantu Kimayi 70 70 Livestock rearing maintained

24 BUSINGWA BUSINGWA De Bremacker Muhindo Kyuma 86,67 86,67 Livestock rearing maintained

25 MUTAMBI MUTAMBI Senioutovitch Mbavuvoja 52 52 Livestock rearing maintained

26 BULIKI BULIKI Broos Armand Bwanakawa 150 150 Livestock rearing maintained

27 BIAKOBE BIAKOBE Gevaert Singa 75 75 Livestock rearing maintained

28 KASAMBIRI KASAMBIRI CNKI block Musungo 212 212 Livestock rearing maintained

29 BIAKOBE BIAKOBE CNKI block Mwenge Katungo 155,91 155,9 Livestock rearing maintained

30 LUMETALYA LUMETALYA Chavier SOCOREZA 284 284 Livestock rearing maintained

TOTAL BENI

3059,08 3059

3. NYIRAGONGO TERRITORY

1 KIGERI KIGERI COMBIGUE MAKABUZA Contract N°2448.321,9321 21,53 21 Livestock rearing maintained

24 | P a g e

2 KIBIRIGA KIBIRIGA LOIQ MAKABUZA D8/0623137 37 31 Livestock rearing maintained

3 KIBIRIGA KIBIRIGA CUSTINE MAKABUZA D8/E13936,6136 36,61 36 Livestock rearing maintained

4 RWANGUBA RWANGUBA LELUVRE NDEZE IRIVUZUM 37 30 Livestock rearing maintained

TOTAL NYIRAGONGO 126,54 120

4. LUBERO TERRITORY

1 MAHUKA MAHUKA MERGAUX Kambere Muhima 410 100 Livestock rearing maintained

2 BIKARA+WIMBI BIKARA+WIMBI DE LEUZE Paluku Mutongerwa 350 300 Livestock rearing maintained

3 KANYAMBI KANYAMBI DE LEUZE Paluku Mutongerwa 100 80 Livestock rearing maintained

4 KIHEMBA KIHEMBA TRIGALLEZ CAPACO/Beni Livestock rearing maintained

5 KASEA KASEA TRIGALLEZ CAPACO/Beni 40 40 Livestock rearing maintained

6 KATALE KATALE WOMARYEARS CAPACO/Beni Livestock rearing maintained

7 KIHEMBA KIHEMBA TWSTAPLES CAPACO/Beni 25 25 Livestock rearing maintained

8 LININE LININE ENGELBRECHT CAPACO/Beni 49 49 Livestock rearing maintained

9 KATWAKAVAKWE KATWAKAVAKWE DE BOGOODIE CAPACO/Beni 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained

10 BISIGHO BISIGHO MERGAUX Tembo Mwambuli NR NR Livestock rearing maintained

11 NDEKO NDEKO MALFEYT Paluku Kagheni 70 70 Livestock rearing maintained

12 BIKARA+WIMBI BIKARA+WIMBI DAVREAUX Muhindo Kakwenz 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained

13 KABIRO II KABIRO II

DE

KERCKHOVE Kambale Musiyera 120 50 Livestock rearing maintained

14 KAVALI KAVALI BROSSENS Kambale Katimba 100 80 Livestock rearing maintained

15 KIMBULU KIMBULU ALMEIDA Sindani Hangi 70 60 Livestock rearing maintained

16 KANIERE KANIERE CNKI Kambale Katimba 360 80 Livestock rearing maintained

17 LUSUKWE Parc n°6 LUSUKWE Mme CARIOTIS Muhindo Bayani 50 45 Livestock rearing maintained

18 LUSUKWE Parc n°7 LUSUKWE Mme CARIOTIS Kambale Saaine 85 50 Livestock rearing maintained

19 KINYAMILUMBI KINYAMILUMBI MOREAUX Kambale Kyavire 180 180 Livestock rearing maintained

20 KATOVO KATOVO kasai Musubao 240 100 Livestock rearing maintained

21 KINYAMILALA KINYAMILALA VAN HOUT kakule kaskoti 100 60 Livestock rearing maintained

22 KYALUMGOODO KYALUMGOODO kambale kyavire 126 70 Livestock rearing maintained

23 MUTENGA MUTENGA Katsuva Kimbesa 198 80 Livestock rearing maintained

24 VUSIGHO VUSIGHO ROUSSEAUX Muheko Kahindo 70 70 Livestock rearing maintained

25 BUTUNDULA BUTUNDULA ANDRE Mwigha Masinda 110 100 Livestock rearing maintained

26 LUKWALIHA LUKWALIHA CNKI Kasereka 120 90 Livestock rearing maintained

27 BUSESA BUSESA VOUTERS Kastuva Mutambo 100 60 Livestock rearing maintained

28 KALEMBA/NGUBI KALEMBA/NGUBI D'HALEWIN Mahuka Nganza 50 40 Livestock rearing maintained

25 | P a g e

29 LWANGONGO Parc n°17 KAYNA CNKI Karushya 100 100 Livestock rearing maintained

30

LWANGONGO Parc

n°15 KAYNA CNKI Karushya 102 102 Livestock rearing maintained

31 LWANGONGO Parc n°9 KAYNA CNKI Semakuba 100 70 Livestock rearing maintained

32

LWANGONGO Parc

n°19 KAYNA CNKI Kahambu Kiluhu 100 90 Livestock rearing maintained

33 LWANGONGO Parc n°20 KAYNA CNKI Kambale Katehi 100 100 Livestock rearing maintained

34

LWANGONGO Parc

n°16 KAYNA CNKI Kambale Muhindo 100 100 Livestock rearing maintained

35 LWANGONGO Parc n°21 KAYNA CNKI Paluku Kabunga 105 105 Livestock rearing maintained

36

LWANGONGO Parc

n°18 KAYNA CNKI Paluku Kabunga 139 139 Livestock rearing maintained

37 KAHOHA KAHOHA CNKI Kambale Kihuhani 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained

38

LWANGONGO Parc

n°4 KAYNA CNKI Muhindo Kyavakama 100 100 Livestock rearing maintained

39 LUHAHI II LUHAHI CNKI Mkambale Wasim 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained

TOTAL LUBERO

4269 2985

5. MASISI TERRITORY

1 LUSHEBERE LUSHEBERE HEPP Diocèse de Goma 200 200 pastureland

2 KATALE KATALE VANDER B Ndakola 50 50 pastureland



5 MUFA MUFA VANDER B Ndakola 103 103 pastureland+crop

6 MUFA MUFA CNKI BLOCK Ndakola 108 108 pastureland+crop

7 TONDO TONDO DUPREZ Mwananteba 200 200 pastureland+crop

8 KITU MAHANGA KITU MAHANGA DUPREZ Mwananteba 120 pastureland

9 KAZIHIRO KAZIHIRO

CNKI

BLOCK Dhani 150 pastureland+crop

10 MABINGO MABINGO

Mme

BREBOSIA Mishonya 100 pastureland+crop

11 MBIZI MBIZI

BLOC

MBIZI Uwimana 111,2 pastureland+crop

12 MUFA MUFA

BLOC

MBIZI Uwimana 58 pastureland+crop

13 MUFA MUFA

HEDO

REGUL Uwimana 50 pastureland+crop

26 | P a g e

14 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE DELVAUX Rutsindula 90 pastureland+crop



17 MBIZI MBIZI

BLOC

MBIZI Dhani 50 pastureland+crop

18 MBIZI MBIZI BLOC MBIZI Mkanirwa 89,25 pastureland+crop

19 BUHALA BUHALA

VENDER

STCHEL Kulu 174 pastureland+crop

20 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Bizima Kara 81 81 pastureland

21 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA

CNKI

BLOCK Bizima Kara 53 53 pastureland

22 TSHANGULUBE ETSHANGULUB CNKI BLOCK Makabuza 129 pastureland

23 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE DELVAUX Ndakola 117 pastureland

24 MBIZI MBIZI

BLOC

MBIZI Bizima Kara 156 pastureland+crop

25 MBIZI MBIZI

BLOC

MBIZI Ndakola 200 pastureland

26 MBIZI MBIZI

CNKI

BLOCK Tukabintabu 120 pastureland+crop

27 MBIZI MBIZI

CNKI

BLOCK Kakwene 120 pastureland+crop

28 BUHENDA BUHENDA CAUWE Gahunga 150 pastureland+reafforestatio

29 KISHINGIRI KISHINGIRI Mme BREBOSIA Mukaruryearswa 98 pastureland+crop

30 MBIZI MBIZI

CNKI

BLOCK Kasoza 98 pastureland+crop

31 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Tukabintabu 95 95 pastureland+reafforestation


CNKI

BLOCK 16,1 16,1 pastureland+crop

33 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Tukabintabu 34 34 pastureland+reafforestation


CNKI

BLOCK Tukabintabu 25 25 pastureland

35 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE DESCHOT MICHEL Kaneno Muhombo 50 50 pastureland+crop

36 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE

DESCHOT

MICHEL Kaneno Muhombo 49 49 pastureland+crop

37 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE DESCHOT MICHEL Kaneno Muhombo 44 44 pastureland+crop


CNKI

BLOCK Safi 127 127 pastureland

27 | P a g e

39 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Makabuza 128 128 pastureland


CNKI

BLOCK Makabuza 96 96 pastureland

41 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE CNKI BLOCK Muhutu 30,7 30,7 pastureland


CNKI

BLOCK Naguru 50 50 pastureland+reafforestation

43 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Serushago 62 62 pastureland

44 MBIZI MBIZI

CNKI

BLOCK Mishiki 65 65 pastureland+crop

45 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Kashani 180 pastureland+crop

46 MBIZI MBIZI

CNKI

BLOCK Gakwene 55 pastureland+crop

47 NYABIONDO NYABIONDO CNKI BLOCK Shamamba 29 pastureland+crop


CNKI

BLOCK Kamudoga 50 pastureland+crop

49 MURAMBI MURAMBI CNKI BLOCK Néo Apostolique 117 pastureland+crop


CNKI

BLOCK Ritaganirwa 38 pastureland+crop

51 TSIRU MUFA TSIRU MUFA CNKI BLOCK Ndaalitsa 195 pastureland+crop

52 MURAMBI MURAMBI

CNKI

BLOCK Néo Apostolique 92 pastureland+crop

53 KAHASHA KAHASHA CNKI BLOCK Mutaka 222 pastureland+crop

54 KAHASHA KAHASHA

CNKI

BLOCK Mutaka 118 pastureland+crop

55 KAHASHA KAHASHA CNKI BLOCK Ndakola 111 pastureland+crop


CNKI

BLOCK Bizima Karah 148 pastureland+crop

57 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Kalinda 100 pastureland+crop


CNKI

BLOCK Kalinda 50 pastureland+crop

59 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Kalinda pastureland+crop


CNKI

BLOCK Kalinda pastureland+crop

61 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE CNKI BLOCK Ntakaziharo 39,5 pastureland+crop

62 KIFUMWE KIFUMWE CNKI Ntakaziharo 31 pastureland+crop

28 | P a g e

BLOCK

63 LUAMA III LUAMA III CROBBE Nkizingiko 60 pastureland+crop

64 LUAMA LUAMA CROBBE Nkizingiko 65 pastureland+crop

65 CHUNGO BLOC CHUNGO BLOC CROBBE Nkizingiko 40 pastureland+crop

66 MUHANGA MUHANGA

CNKI

BLOCK Ndakola 150 pastureland+crop

67 RUSIKA RUSIKA

CNKI

BLOCK Karuganda 80 80 pastureland+crop

68 LUSHEBERE LUSHEBERE

CNKI

BLOCK Ndakadayu 60 60 pastureland+crop

69 KIKOMA KIKOMA

CNKI

BLOCK Mulengezi 147 pastureland+crop

70 CHUNGO BLOC CHUNGO BLOC

CNKI

BLOCK Nkizingike 40 pastureland+crop

71 LUAMA LUAMA GENARRI Banziziki 82 pastureland+crop

72 LUAMA LUAMA BATIN Banziziki 42 pastureland+crop

73 LUAMA LUAMA VARHALST Sekayange 80 pastureland+crop

74 LUAMA LUAMA VARHALST Mbekoet pastureland+crop

75 NDALAGA NDALAGA DUMON COCOBU 200 200 pastureland+crop

76 NDALAGA NDALAGA DUMON Habyambere 82 82 pastureland+crop

77 BUBOKO BUBOKO MARCHAL Budoni 119 119 pastureland+crop

78 BIRAMBIZO BIRAMBIZO DUVON Monastère/Mokoto 33 33 pastureland+crop

79 KIHIMBA KIHIMBA DEWIT Bisukiro 14 14 pastureland+crop

80 NGURU NGURU DAPREZ Sakina 50 50 pastureland+crop

81 KAHIRA KAHIRA ERNOTTE Muhindo 50 pastureland+crop

82 NGURU NGURU DEPREZ Rwakineza 50 pastureland+crop

83 LUAMA LUAMA BRAKAEN Mukengango 63 pastureland+crop

84 TSHUNGO TSHUNGO DEHERCH Ngerageze 120 pastureland+crop

85 MUSHWA MUSHWA CNKI BLOCK Ruhinya 112 112 pastureland+crop

86 MUSHWA MUSHWA

CNKI

BLOCK Miburo 118 118 pastureland+crop

87 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Miburo 98 98 pastureland+crop


CNKI

BLOCK Balinda 200 200 pastureland+crop

89 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Kabanda 130 130 pastureland+crop

90 BUMBA BUMBA KALINDA Buyore 114 pastureland+crop

29 | P a g e

91 NYARUNABA NYARUNABA CNKI BLOCK Nguringoma 171,5 100 pastureland+crop


CNKI

BLOCK Gasasita 400 370 pastureland+crop

93 NYARUNABA NYARUNABA BUNVANTORE Ntunyanzo 171 100 pastureland+crop

94 BUMBA BUMBA Byoyoyo 146 100 pastureland+crop

95 BUHULE BUHULE Komayombi 60 60 pastureland+crop

96 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA Komayombi 60 60 pastureland+crop

97 KAUNDU KAUNDU Serufuli 600 pastureland+crop

98 OSSO OSSO Bisengimana 1000 900 pastureland+crop

99 BUNYOLE BUNYOLE

MINENCHI

N Ngezayo 200 200 pastureland+crop

100 MUSHUNUNU MUSHUNUNU KALINDA Ngezayo 100 100 pastureland+crop

101 KASHASHA KASHASHA SHABA Mugenzi NR NR pastureland+crop

102 MIRUMBA MIRUMBA KASUKU Karuretwa 63 pastureland+crop

103 MUSHUNUNU MUSHUNUNU Rwabahenda pastureland+crop

104 KAHASHA KAHASHA CNKI BLOCK Ndakola 112 pastureland+crop

105 MBIZI MBIZI

CNKI

BLOCK Mbua 24 pastureland+crop

106 MUKOHWA MUKOHWA Mme ROMBEAU Kasese 100 pastureland+crop

107 MUKOHWA MUKOHWA

CNKI

BLOCK Mastaki 50 pastureland+crop

108

109 LULAMBO LULAMBO

CNKI

BLOCK Karunganda 170 pastureland+crop

110 RUSIKA RUSIKA

CNKI

BLOCK Kaboyi 30 pastureland+crop

111 NGUNGU NGUNGU Mme SHARE Rusangiza pastureland+crop

112 NGUNGU NGUNGU Rubibi 103 pastureland+crop

113 NGUNGU NGUNGU MEYA ALBERT Mbarusha 58 pastureland+crop

114 NGUNGU NGUNGU

MOUS

AMBROISE Bitegesimana 43 pastureland+crop

115 NGUNGU NGUNGU NOUSPEIGNOUS Kitsa Mutumayi 30 pastureland+crop

116 NGUNGU NGUNGU VIET BORS Kabera 50 pastureland+crop

117 NGUNGU NGUNGU Mlle GRUME Kajibwana 50 pastureland+crop

118 BISHASHA BISHASHA MICHELAR Ndachombenze 118 pastureland+crop

30 | P a g e

119 BISHASHA BISHASHA Nkundaka pastureland+crop

120 BUMBA BUMBA DERONDE Ndahombakare 100 pastureland+crop

121 TEBERO TEBERO LEON Bulenda 91 pastureland+crop

122 MUANVURA MUANVURA PONEELET Ngaeyo 36 pastureland+crop

123 MUANVURA MUANVURA

BORNYEAR

S Karangwa 81 pastureland+crop

124 MUKOBERWA MUKOBERWA DUMON Gahananyi 100 pastureland+crop

125 MUHANIRA MUHANIRA

BANDENHE

UVE Kanyove 50 pastureland+crop

126 MUHANIRA MUHANIRA

BANDENHE

UVE Kabasha Ngabo 85 pastureland+crop

127 KITONDO KITONDO GILWER Habarugira 290 pastureland+crop

128 LUMBICHI LUMBICHI GILWER Kanyanduki 167 pastureland+crop

129 KIROLIRWE KIROLIRWE AUGUSTE Karamuhetu 60 pastureland+crop

130 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Kaurwa 32 pastureland+crop

131 MBIZI MBIZI

CNKI

BLOCK Kinyakura 174 pastureland+crop

132 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Malira 64 pastureland+crop

133 MBIZI MBIZI

CNKI

BLOCK Muhima pastureland+crop

134 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Serenge 22 pastureland+crop

135 MBIZI MBIZI

CNKI

BLOCK Population 112 pastureland+crop

136 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Kasoza 98 pastureland+crop

137 KABATI KISUMA

CNKI

BLOCK Tukabintabu 95 pastureland+crop

138 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Tukabintabu 16,1 pastureland+crop

139 KATUHUNDA KATUHUNDA

MmE

CORMANE Matabishi 63 pastureland

140 KATUHUNDA KATUHUNDA PATERROIL Matabishi 100 pastureland

141 MBIZI MBIZI

CNKI

BLOCK Nguba 14 pastureland

142 KABATI KISUMA DRIEX Pay Pay 109 pastureland

143 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA DRIEX Pay Pay 114 pastureland

144 RUVUNDA RUVUNDA JOSEPH Kamari 70 pastureland

145 RUSHENGO RUSHENGO BOLOGNE Muhambikwa 129 pastureland

146 RUVUNDA RUVUNDA MENAGER Kinangabo 71 pastureland

31 | P a g e

147 RUSHENGO II RUSHENGO II BOLOGNE Kulange 125 pastureland

148 RUVUNDA II RUVUNDA II

MEGNEGNI

NER Baziaka 55 pastureland

TOTAL MASISI

14390,35

32 | P a g e

III.3. COMMENTS ON THESE DATA.

3.1. General comments:

The data presented reflects unease in the land management system in North Kivu province for

several reasons.

- First, the inability of land services department to avail and update timely reliable data.

- Failure to manage real information on the ground concerning titles issued.

- The lack of willingness by land actors to facilitate the work of the land services

department to have all the data.

- A weakness in the land services department to impose policies on various actors.

- Then, this problem gives rise to a number of hypotheses which must be clarified

concerning the following issue:

1. Who profits from this disorderly situation?

2. Why are the interested parties not in a hurry to regularize neither to make

known their rights on these when demanding their right of ownership?

3. Must we really think that these rights are not protected so much by the

documents?

3.2. Specific comments.

3.2.1. According to the security documents, we realized that for those who have the

documents or say those who availed the documents to us, the study found 7

types of documents namely:

- Certificate of ownership.

- Certificate of occupation.

- Allotment letter.

- Request for land.

- Certificate.

- Contract.

- Transfer certificate.

If some are registered in the nomenclature of Congolese land legislation, others on the

contrary find their value in the legitimacy finally there are others who would be qualified by

documents delivered by anon competent authority.

For legal documents, it should be noted: the certificate, the contract, the request for land.

On the contrary the following documents are legitimate: transfer certificate, certificate of

ownership, certificate of occupation and the allotment letter.

3.2.2. In relation to the high number of farms and plantations whose information was

not available:

It should be emphasized that the data are not available are concentrated in one group. These

groups are MUTANDA BUKOMBO and BISHUSHA. Regarding the latter, a high density of

conflict and insecurity due to land disputes not resolved by the courts should be noted. Added

to this is the inability of successive authorities to resolve the conflict around the

customary/traditional power that opposes the ruling families.

We found ourselves in a situation, where the local land titles office refers to the provincial

office while the latter refers to the office of the division of the territory that is supposed to

manage this issue.

The direct consequence is that the owners of these plantations are not only land insecure, but

also the local people do not really know where to go when negotiating the rights to exploit

these vast areas sometimes not entirely exploited.

What is also true, the rightful owners of these plantations do not want most of times to put

themselves to risk as belonging to one or another camp of the royal families in conflict.

33 | P a g e

It is very likely that the operations of land sales have taken place during the customary power

struggles that led to land dispossession of many households of small producers.

3.2.3. CNKI blocks, or the National Committee of Kivu:

Created in 1928 by the colonial power, CNKI distributed them to settles for

agricultural exploitations or farms. These blocks have been grabbed by the ruling

elite. The National Committee of Kivu had acquired during its creation « the

monopoly of land management corresponding to the former Kivu district. Based on a

survey work, the committee constituted “colonization blocks” (land considered

suitable for agriculture and livestock sectors) which they hired to European settlers».

With the end of colonization, and with the new land law and nationalization followed by

radical changes, the state has recovered these areas and distributed, to the dismay of local

people, to some political elites obedient to Mobutu at that time.

In fact, while the population, who had felt dispossessed of their land, thought they would

recover land from the hands of settlers after independence and later with the drastic measures

from the Mobutu regime. These large areas were simply taken over by private agricultural

actors. We can mention that among these actors are politicians, economists and intellectuals.

Only a block continues to be exploited by local people after many struggles that were

sometimes bloody clashes in the region. This is KIPFUMU block in MASISI territory with an

estimated area of 120 hectares.

The current exploiters sometimes have titles that the relevant departments do not recognize

but not according to the words of those responsible according to our meeting of 20th

February

at the land titles office in Goma town.

The concerned said that we must first of all exhaust the process of decommisioning in order to

assign these lands to particular exploiters/operators.

The head of works Fr X. SEBAKUNZI Ntibuka, in « the political dimension in land conflicts

in the mountains of Kivu: conflicts between KALINDA and BUCYANAYANDI in MASISI

territory » believes that CNKI was managing about 96732 ha or 967,32 Km2.

He also says that « the settlers carve out large plantations and livestock farms (Nyabiondo:

2500ha, Loashi 1050 ha, Lubaya 2360ha…) from high value productive land taken away form

the indigenous people. In total 15860 ha was taken over by plantations ». The difference

between these data from C.T SEBAKUNZI and ours finds its explantation in the fact that

some exploitors/operators know how to withdraw their transfer certificates from the liste of

CNKI blocks by obtaining title deeds from various relevent authorities.

The issue of management of CNKI recovery divide the actors in North Kivu province.

On the one hand, the administration believes that under the law, all these blocks are incomes

from state land. In addition, it was decided by the administration that CNKI has the

monopoly to manage all these issues.

Nevertheless, to be exploited by third parties, these blocks must first of all be regulated.

Which did not seem to be the case for several among them..

On the other hand, the customary leaders continue to think that they must revover the lands

which were taken from them by an arbitrary decision, with neither prior compensation nor

consultation.

Finally, the populations, through their organizations believe that these lands should be

allocated to the local sorounding communities’ because they have less and less

arable/cultivable land given the soaring population pressure.

In total, about 13700 hectares are owned or better said «grabbed» by private actors

mentionned above at the expense of the local populations as indicated in the table below:

IV. CNKI BLOCKS : NATIONAL COMMITTEE OF KIVU

34 | P a g e

Several land distributed by CNKI were owned by various actors. This was to the great shock

of the local communities. The table below presents the situation of these lands just after

recovery by the Congolese state.

Table n° ______LIST OF FARMS AND PLANTATIONS BELONGING TO CNKI

BLOCKS

N° NAME OF THE

FARM/PLANT

ATION

LOCATION FORMER

OWNER

NEW OWNER TITLE TOT.

ARE

A

S

M

V

LUBERO TERRITORY Farms and plantations

1 KANIERE KANIERE CNKI Kambale Katimba 360 80

2

LWANGONGO Parc

n°17 KAYNA CNKI Karushya 100 100

3 LWANGONGO Parc n°15 KAYNA CNKI Karushya 102 102

4

LWANGONGO Parc

n°9 KAYNA CNKI Semakuba 100 70

5

LWANGONGO Parc

n°19 KAYNA CNKI

Kahambu

Kiluhu 100 90

6

LWANGONGO Parc

n°20 KAYNA CNKI

Kambale

Katehi 100 100

7

LWANGONGO Parc

n°16 KAYNA CNKI

Kambale

Muhindo 100 100

8

LWANGONGO Parc

n°21 KAYNA CNKI

Paluku

Kabunga 105 105

9

LWANGONGO Parc

n°18 KAYNA CNKI

Paluku

Kabunga 139 139

10 KAHOHA KAHOHA CNKI

Kambale

Kihuhani 50 50

11

LWANGONGO Parc

n°4 KAYNA CNKI

Muhindo

Kyavakama 100 100

12. Komba Komba CNKI Pères

assomptionniste

10 10

13. Mahamba Q.Mahamba CNKI Pères

assomptionniste

23 23

14. Vutala Malende CNKI Diocèse de

Butembo-Beni

180 180

15. ITAV Vutsundo CNKI Diocèse de

Butembo-Beni

164 164

16. CEBCE Malende CNKI CEBCE 26 26

17. Bel air Cité de Butembo Ville de

Butembo

22ha 22

18. Hôpital de Katwa katwa CNKI CBACA 8ha 8

19. UCG

Vutatimbwa CNKI Diocèse de

Butembo-Beni

340ha 340

20. Kambali BUTEMBO CNKI Pères

assomptionniste

s

5ha à 5

35 | P a g e

21. Léproserie Katwa CNKI CBCA 23ha 23

22. kirimavolo Katwa CNKI CBCA 9ha 9

23. Nzoli Kimbesa Mutanga CNKI NZOLI

KIMBESA

196ha 196

24. Paluku Lolwako kangote/Musit CNKI PALOS 13ha 13

25. Srs oblates de

l’assomption

Passionnat CNKI Srs OBLATES 13ha 13

26. Kambale Kiputsu Kipese CNKI KIPUTSU 114ha 114

27. Paluku Lolwako Masereka CNKI PALOS 177ha 177

28. Paluku Mbumba Bukenye CNKI MBUMBA 51ha 51

29. Vighole Kavanda CNKI Tabu Bin

Witende

36ha 36

30. Kambale Katimba kimbulu CNKI KATIMBA 65ha 60

31 MBANGA kimbulu CNKI Kambale

Mbanga

70ha 70

32. Bloc Biena

Masumko CNKI N.R. 95h N.R

33. Bloc Luhahi kimbulu CNKI N.R. 130ha N.R

34. Bloc Mutoto Lubero CNKI N.R. 170ha 120

35. Bloc kamaheri Kimbulu CNKI N.R. 85ha N.R

36. Bloc Lutembe Vusamba/

Lutembe

CNKI N.R. 45ha N.R

37. Bloc Ngora Vsamba/Ngoro CNKI N.R. 75ha N.R

38. Bloc Kibirakoko vusamba vers

kasinga

CNKI N.R. 90ha 35

39. Bloc kavare.. N.R. CNKI N.R. 60ha N.R

40. Bloc lubughe

N.R. CNKI N.R. 175ha N.R

41. Bloc kaniangoko N.R. CNKI N.R. 95ha 46

42. Bloc Bisaravwe Visaravwe CNKI N.R. 60ha 56

43. Bloc kifuko cité Bapere CNKI N.R. 493ha N.R

44. Bloc Nya-nya Bapere CNKI N.R. 466ha N.R

45. Bloc Kambala

Bapere CNKI N.R. 473ha N.R

46. Bloc Mupanda Bapere CNKI N.R. 490ha N.R

47. Bloc Mandjinga Bapere CNKI N.R. 437ha N.R

36 | P a g e

48. Bloc Masisi Bapere CNKI N.R. 457ha N.R

49. Bloc Lendopolitiki Bapere CNKI N.R. 438ha N.R

50. Bloc Malunguna Bapere CNKI N.R. 403ha N.R

51. Bloc Kifuko Bapere CNKI N.R. 459ha N.R

52. Bloc Lonia Bapere CNKI N.R. 424 ha N.R

53. Bloc Kariere bapere CNKI N.R. 365ha N.R

54. Bloc Matadi Bapere CNKI N.R. 393ha N.R

55. Bloc Miere. Bapere CNKI N.R. 85ha N.R

56. Bloc Mamboa à à

Lubero

Wasa Mamboa CNKI N.R. 132ha N.R

57. Bloc colonial Mususa de

kirimba Bukenie)

CNKI Michels Ernest 22ha N.R

58. Bloc de colonisation Musasa Lubero CNKI N.R. 22ha N.R

59. Bloc vuhumbi

Butembo buyora CNKI N.R. 22ha N.R

60. LUHAHI II LUHAHI CNKI

Mkambale

Wasim 50 50

TOTAL CNKI BLOCK in LUBERO TERRITORY 9472 1193

BENI TERRITORY PLANTATIONS

61. KONGOLI KIMA KONGOLI KIMA CNKI block Mumbere Ndianabo 272

62. MANZAMUNDO MANZAMUNDO CNKI block Van Hoof Louis 84 84

63. KIBWE MADIWE CNKI block Van Hoof Louis 100 100 64. ALOYA MADIWE CNKI block Van Hoof Louis 90 90 65. MAMBENA MAMBENA CNKI block Kasereka Kasi 400 400

66. MANZAMUNDO MANZAMUNDO CNKI block Katembo Vuma 100 100

67. MALONDO MALONDO CNKI block Kayembe Manda 50 50

68. TABI TABI CNKI block Millor Roger 131 131



71. TABI TABI CNKI block Millor Roger 78

72. LUHULE MADIWE CNKI block Pick Bing Marc 125 73. LUHULE MADIWE CNKI block Pick Bing Marc 114 114 74. LUHULE MADIWE CNKI block Pick Bing Marc 100 100 75. TOTAL AREA FOR CNKI PLANTATIONS IN BENI TERRITORY 1822

FARMS 76. KASAMBIRI KASAMBIRI CNKI block Musungo 212 212

77. BIAKOBE BIAKOBE CNKI block Mwenge Katungo 155,91

155,

9

TOTAL AREA OF FARMS IN BENI TERRITORY 367,91

RUTSHURU TERRITORY PLANTATIONS

78. KIBUTUTU gpt Bukoma CNKI block Ruz Mr Remis 80

� We did not find a farm which belonged to CNKI block

MASISI TERRITORY

PLANTATIONS 79 KIPFUMU Kipfumu CNKI block Bakungu Mayao 112

80 KIPFUMU Kipfumu CNKI block Bakungu Kalwy 112

81 NYANGE Nyange CNKI block Muhima 120

82 NGEREKO Ngereko CNKI block Baramisi

37 | P a g e

83 KIPFUMU Kipfumu CNKI block Population 120

TOTAL PLANTATIONS AREA IN MASISI 464

FARMS 84 MUFA MUFA CNKI BLOCK Ndakola 108 108

85 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Bizima Kara 81 81

86 KABATI KISUMA

KABATI

KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Bizima Kara 53 53

87 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE CNKI BLOCK Makabuza 129

88 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Tukabintabu 120

89 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Kakwene 120

90 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Kasoza 98

91 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Tukabintabu 95 95 92 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK 16,1 16,1 93 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Tukabintabu 34 34 94 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Tukabintabu 25 25

95 KABATI

KABATI

KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Safi 127 127

96 KABATI KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Makabuza 128 128

97 KABATI

KABATI

KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Makabuza 96 96

98 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE CNKI BLOCK Muhutu 30,7 30,7

99 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE CNKI BLOCK Naguru 50 50

1O0 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Serushago 62 62 101 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Mishiki 65 65

102 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Kashani 180

103 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Gakwene 55

104 NYABIONDO NYABIONDO CNKI BLOCK Shamamba 29

105 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE CNKI BLOCK Kamudoga 50 106 MURAMBI MURAMBI CNKI BLOCK Néo Apostolique 117

107 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE CNKI BLOCK Ritaganirwa 38 108 TSIRU MUFA TSIRU MUFA CNKI BLOCK Ndaalitsa 195

109 MURAMBI MURAMBI CNKI BLOCK Néo Apostolique 92

110 KAHASHA KAHASHA CNKI BLOCK Mutaka 222

111 KAHASHA KAHASHA CNKI BLOCK Mutaka 118

112 KAHASHA KAHASHA CNKI BLOCK Ndakola 111

113 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Bizima Karaha 148

114 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Kalinda 100

115 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Kalinda 50

116 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Kalinda

117 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Kalinda

118 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE CNKI BLOCK Ntakaziharo 39,5 119 KIFUMWE KIFUMWE CNKI BLOCK Ntakaziharo 31

120 MUHANGA MUHANGA CNKI BLOCK Ndakola 150

121 RUSIKA RUSIKA CNKI BLOCK Karuganda 80 80

122 LUSHEBERE LUSHEBERE CNKI BLOCK Ndakadayu 60 60

123 KIKOMA KIKOMA CNKI BLOCK Mulengezi 147

124 CHUNGO BLOC CHUNGO BLOC CNKI BLOCK Nkizingike 40

125 MUSHWA MUSHWA CNKI BLOCK Ruhinya 112 112

126 MUSHWA MUSHWA CNKI BLOCK Miburo 118 118

127 KABATI

KABATI

KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Miburo 98 98

128 KABATI KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Balinda 200 200

129 KABATI

KABATI

KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Kabanda 130 130

130 NYARUNABA NYARUNABA CNKI BLOCK Nguringoma 171,5 100

131 KABATI KABATI CNKI BLOCK Gasasita 400 370

132 KAHASHA KAHASHA CNKI BLOCK Ndakola 112

133 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Mbua 24

134 MUKOHWA MUKOHWA CNKI BLOCK Mastaki 50

135 LULAMBO LULAMBO CNKI BLOCK Karunganda 170

136 RUSIKA RUSIKA CNKI BLOCK Kaboyi 30

137 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Kaurwa 32

138 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Kinyakura 174

139 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Malira 64

140 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Muhima

38 | P a g e

141 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Serenge 22

142 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Population 112

143 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Kasoza 98

144 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Tukabintabu 95

145 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Tukabintabu 16,1

146 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Nguba 14

TOTAL FARM AREA 5476

TOTAL AREA OF CNKI BLOCK LAND GRABBED 17735

� CNKI blocks of MASISI territory were in quasi totalilty grabbed by individuals and at

the expense of traditional chiefs and local people. This behavior of land actors is

explained by several researchers, as the fact that people taken as workforce would

rather free themselves from the customary system of land management. In fact, so as

not to continually depend on moods, tantrums and uncertainties of traditional leaders,

actors prefer to seek land directly land from land administration. More still, the

indigenous people are never in a hurry, at least in the last ten decades, to grant land

use rights to those they call the intruders. Cfr MUGANGU .S.op cit.

� On the other hand, the quasi totality, the CNKI blocks of Lubero territory in Bapere

community, are neither informed nor operated on at least for the moment. This is due

to the fact that the region has for a long time been isolated and since the departure of

the settlers very few players/actors are really interested in this sector Bapere, which is

also the largest in the territory of Lubero and having an area on its own of (8872km2),

almost double the Masisi territory (4734) and slightly larger than the territory of Beni

(7484). Bapere is the least populated in the territory and the second just after

WALIKALE across the province in terms of low population density.

The insecurity that has prevailed for long time in this forest region, the militias that are

fighting the mining sectors, are the reason behind the land actors not being truly interested to

grab land in these blocks and land that is generally not inhabited.

The blocks of this region were famous for their mineral production.

With the gradual establishment of peace in the region, it is feared that the miners of any kind

can not rush to this "jungle" if appropriate measures are not taken to protect the indigenous

people and conserve the ecosystem that the pygmies know how to safeguard to date.

The negotiations that are ongoing between the Congolese government and the French

company BOLORE to exploit these mineral regions are to be considered in the perspective of

future land expropriation at the expense of local people.

Our face to face meetings in PARIS with representatives of that big French company

BOLORE have not produced results to verify this information and unfortunately the day’s

government does not want to publish the contracts under negotiation or already signed

contracts.

In the same geographical light, in the territory of Beni, the collective sector of Beni-Mbau, in

the BABILA-BAKAIKU locality, the company « CHRISTIAN LIFE WORLD MISSION

FRONTIER » has just acquired a big transfer of about 1440 ha, after a lot of negotiations and

complications from the political elite from the area. Despite the major sensitization of the

customary chiefs by the civil society organizations and the opposition of some independent

technicians for the purchase or say the sale of land by customary chiefs, they gave in to the

temptation of money given to them.

The civil society organizations, who were not opposed at all to the establishing of this

American company through its Korean branch, proposed that indeginous land must be

considered as their capital contribution in the company and would therefore become also

shareholders of the company.

Les responsables de cette société n’ont pas du tout accepté cette formule d’exploitation.

39 | P a g e

THE PROBLEM OF CREATING PARKS IN THE NORTH KIVU PROVINCE.

The creation of parks in North Kivu province, in as much as it seemed not to have immediate

visible consequences on the availability of land has become later on one of the causes of land

conflicts in North Kivu, putting into consideration the area they occupy and the increasing

population pressure in the region.

Two parks were created in the province in 1925, for the VIRUNGA Park and in 1947 for the

MAIKO Park respectively.

The following table presents per territory the areas occupied by the parks.

Table n° _____. Area of parks per territory in North Kivu province.

N° Territory Total

area (Km2)

Park area % Observations

VIRUNGA MAIKO

1. Rutshuru 5289 2846 0 53

2. Masisi 4.744 362 0 7

3. Walikale 23475

4. Nyiragongo 333 170 0 51

5. Lubero 18096

6. Beni 7484 3300

TOTAL

AREA

59.631 7900

Take note right away that these park areas are sometimes challenged by the parties for the

people living along the river and the Congolese Institute for Conservation

of Nature, ICCN, and the organization that manages parks in the DRC. However, these

figures are relatively close to reality. We have several sources that give different

figures especially in terms of Rutshuru territory.

As can be seen, the creation of parks also subtracted from the arable land of local

communities, a large area that these communities continue to claim rightly or wrongly.

As highlighted, Professor MUGANGU MATABARO "The creation of Virunga National

Park had the effect over the same period not only of reducing the available land but also of

displacing communities or parts of communities, placing them under the political and land

dependence situation of the host communities "MUGANGU MATABARO S. The land

crisis in eastern DRC; the African Great Lakes. 2007.2008 Directory, P.30.

V. WAVE OF CREATION OF RESERVES AND TOWNS FROM LARGER CITIES OR TOWN ARES.

Community Reserves: For many reasons and motivation various civil society actors

and traditional leaders create in an accelerated manner forest reserves: Sometimes referred to

as "protected area, sometimes community reserves," and this is a way of depriving the

indigenous people cultivable land.

A last attempt has been made by the provincial government to create new cities given

their high concentration of people. A total of 17 new cities with about 1500 ha escape the

customary management of land.

The fierce opposition of traditional leaders against the project pushed this power to back

down. But this is only a postponement. Rapid urbanization is the basis of the subtraction of

land available for local communities and traditional leaders.

The following table identifies the reserves and their respective areas in different territories of

the province:

40 | P a g e

Table n°_____ Reserves and proctected areas in North Kivu province.

N° TERRITORY PROTECTED AREA OR

RESERVE

AREA OBSERVATIONS

1. Rutshuru 1.

2.

2. Masisi

3. Walikale

4. Nyiragongo 1. KIBUMBA : 1

2. BUHUMBA : 2

3. MUDJA : 1

4. KIBATI : 1

5. Lubero 1. TAYNA

2. KYAVIRIMU

3.

6. Beni 1.

2.

3.

TOTAL AREA

VI. BIG TRANSACTIONS IN THE LAST TEN YEARS.

In this section we raise in particular the following points which were the subject of our

investigations in the territories doing these investigations was possible:

It should be noted that due to several factors including primarily insecurity, there have not

been several cases of land grabbing by trans national organisations/companies. Indeed, they

are not always in a hurry to invest in areas of insecurity such as eastern DRC

However, a phenomenon has been observed since the country is experiencing some sort of

peace. Local political actors are particularly interested in land for several reasons including:

1. Investing in land as a safe haven. Indeed, with continuing insecurity, the traditional

business as is done in region that is to say "buying and selling" of goods imported as

local sales, has high risk of looting.

2. Anticipation on the phenomenon "cargoode Map." Since the international community

speaks a lot about cargoode, some players have expectation of a future market thus

buying large land from the traditional leaders.

3. Some foreign companies have also gotten large-scale acquisitions in anticipation of

major agricultural, pastoral and mining activities.

4. Some took advantage of the various consecutive regimes in managing the province in

order to own parcels of land in full contempt of the law.

Unfortunately several factors did not allow us to fully comprehend this phenomenon.

- 1. Our study, being very limited in terms of means and time, encountered socio-political,

cultural and security obstacles.

41 | P a g e

- 2. Strategies to cover all operation transactions of selling and buying of land by various

parties. Vendors generally, traditional leaders, do not want small-scale farmers to know that

their land was sold by their leaders to third parties. The buyers in turn, do not want these

operations are known so as to avoid both tax and reaction from framers whose land they paid

for.

- 3. The pressure from the union and human rights organizations defending human rights that

interfere with the actions of these as relates to the sale of land owned and operated by local

communities.

- 4. Armed groups and militias also spearhead the ‘fight’ against land grabbing of ‘ancestral

land’, by other parties at times by strangers with unknown motives.

For all these reasons, there are certainly many cases of land transactions which took place but

remain unknown by the administration and worse still by the people.

The study had responses and testimonies with respect to the following cases as having been

subject to heavy land negotiations between several actors:

42 | P a g e

Table n°____Table of some cases that were subject of land transactions in North Kivu

province from 2000 to 2010.

1. Masisi territory

43 | P a g e

FARM OR

PASTURELAND

OWNER PLACE AREA TITLE AND

DURATION

01. BUBOGO Farm KAKIRA-

LEONIDAS

BUBOGO 120ha Permanent

02. ISSA-BALUME Farm BALUME BUBOGO 50ha 25years

03. LUHONGA Farm SANDRO LUHONGA 352 Permanent

04. NDALAGA Farm COCOBU BUTARE

300ha

25years

05. NKIRANGANWA

Farm

COCOBU BUTARE 25years

06. RUJUGIRO Farm RUJUGIRO KILORIRWE 150ha 25years

07. KARAHA Farm KARAHA KILORIRWE 60ha 25years

08. MAJORO Farm MAJORO KILORIRWE 25years

09. MADAME MERLO

Farms (all)

MADAME

MERLO

- KILORIRWE

- BIBATAMA

- TEBERO

3.000ha 25years

10. KAVEDO Farm KAVEDO KILORIRWE 150ha 25years

11. RUGABA Farm RUGABA KILORIRWE 25years

12. Goma diocese (all its

farms and pastureland

(parishes)

DIOCESE - 2049 25years

13. KIRIVITA Farm KIRIVITA NYABURA 260ha 25years

14. TEBERO Farm SEMANA TEBERO 60ha 25years

15. BAHATI Farm BAHATI TEBERO 25years

16. KABATI Farm MUNYARUGER

ERO

KABATI 25years

17. AMANI school LYCEE AMANI KABATI 25years

18. MUGUGU block - MWESO 25years

19. BAHANI Farm BAHANI ROJEBESHI 25years

20. HERMAN Farm HERMAN BISEMBE 25years

21. RUHANA MIRI NDI

Farm

RUHANAMIRE BURUNGU 62ha 25years

22. KAMANZI Farm KAMANZI SAKE 25years

23. ZIMULINDA Farm VINCENT

ZIMUEL

RUBAYA 25years

24. INNOCENT Farm GAHIZI

INNOCENT

RUBAYA 25years

44 | P a g e

25. OSSO Farm BISENGIMANA OSSO 2.004ha 25years

26. NDAKOLA Farm NDAKOLA KATALE 1003 ha 25years

27. LOSHI Farm NGIRABATWA

RE

LUASHI 370 ha 25years

28. RWABAHENDA Farm RWABAHEND

A

BURAMO 250ha 25years

29. BITEGETSIMANA

Farm

BITEGETSIMA

NA

BURAMO 210ha 25years

30. RIGO Farm RIGO KISUMA N.R. 25years

31. SANGIRA Farm SANGIRA RUVUNDA N.R 25years

32. RWAGATI Farm RWAGATI RUVUNDA 105ha 25years

33. SAFI Farm SAFI ADILI NGUNGU N.R 25years

34. KASUKU Farms (All) KASUKU NGUNGU-

NYABURA

1.850ha 25years

35. GAHAMANYI Farm GAHAMANYI BURUNGU 55ha 25years

36. NDAYAMBAJE Farm NDAYAMBAJE NGUNGU 60ha 25years

37. MWINYANTORE

Farm

RUTWE KIBABI N.R. 25years

38. LUANDA Farm FRANCOIS

LUANDA

KIBABI N.R 25years

39. SENINGA Farm SENINGA KIBABI N.R 25years

40. OSWALD Farm MUKINGI KIBABI 155ha 25years

41. SERUFULI Farm SERUFILI KIRONKO N.R 25years

42. MOINES DE

MOKOTOS

MOINES MOKOTO 300ha 25years

43. KALINDA Farm FAMILLE

KALINDA

BWEREMAN

A

N.R 25years

44. Farm KIBIRA KIBIRA –

THOMAS

LUSHANGI 65ha 25years

45. LUSHANGI Farm KARGO-

TWAGIRA

LUSHANGI N.R 25years

46. RUJUGIRO Farm RUJUGIRO KITCHANGA 250ha 25years

47. MADAME SENATA

Farm

SENATA MUSHAKI 60ha 25years

48. HESHIMA Farm HESHIMA MUSHAKI N.R 25years

49. DUNIA Farm DUNIA MUSHAKI 122ha 25years

45 | P a g e

50. RWUBAKA Farm RWUBAKA KATOYI 200ha 25years

51. HACERI Farm HACERI KATOYI 104ha 25years

52. BIGEMBE Farm BIGEMBE KATOYI N.R 25years

53. ZIMULINDA Farm ZIMULINDA

ANTHER

KATOYI N.R 25years

54. RUKAMATA Farm RUKAMATA KATOYI 305 ha 25years

55. MUPOROSO Farm MUPOROSO KATOYI 283ha 25years

56. SEREME Farm SEREME KAUSA 150ha 25years

57. KANYOVE Farm FAMILLE

KANYOVE

KAUSA 120ha 25years

58. UWIMANA Farm UWIMANA MAHANGA 205ha 25years

59. NGULU Farm - KIZIMBA N.R 25years

60. MUUNABANDI block - KIZIMBA N.R 25years

TOTAL ESTIMATES FOR MASISI 14839 ie

approxima

tely

15000ha.

Source: In charge of the MASISI land registry and 1 member of FEC.


46 | P a g e

Table n° ___ Listed cases in Rutshuru territory N° Name of

the expl

Proprietor/Nationality Area Location or map Intended

goals

Consultation

undertakent

with other

actors

1 Domaine de

KATALE

MICHEL Baudouin/

Belge

4326 ha BIRUMA,

KATAKE, and

NYONGERA

-Production

and

marketing of

good quality

coffee

-Coffee

exportation

for industry

-agricultural

research for

introduction

of new seed

variety

-Contract with

the congo

government

- Use of local

labour/workforce

2 Jardin

teaicole de

Ngeri

(GTN)

BUCQUEY

ACHIEL/Portu

gais

2007 ha BUKOMBO/Bwito

chieftancy

Production

and

marketing of

tea

Idem

3 Bertolé BERTOLE

GERORGES/

Polonais

200 ha KISHARU area Production

and

marketing of

palm oil

Idem

4 Mangat MANGAT/

Indienne

250 ha KISHARU area Production

and

exportation

of palm oil

Idem

5 Liwali LIWALIWA/

belge

100 ha KAHUNGA Coffee

marketing

Idem

47 | P a g e

-awareness

creation on

coffee

production

TOTAL IN RUTSHURU 6883

48 | P a g e

The cases noted in Rutshuru territory are not in themselves cases whose transactions were

done in the last ten years. But given their extent or scope in the region, the populations think

that they are recent cases which have had alot of consequences/effects on life and land

security of the local communities.

KATALE is the most talked about in the whole of Rutshuru territory.

Table n°____ Cases identified in Butembo and Kayna.

No Concessionnaires Area Geographic

situation

Take over

date

1 KATINA MBAYAHI 4ha Witere in Lubero

territory

01/04/2008

2 KATEMBO

MUTSUVA ABEL

3ha Ndando 01/03/2008

3 CODEKI 14ha Kavali

Musienene

11/01/2008

4 KATEMBO

KATALIVWA Daniel

7ha Masuli 29/09/2007

5 MBUSA KAYUMBU 6ha Vuliki 11/09/2007

6 KISONI KAMBALE

Sem

29ha Lubero 01/09/2006

7 MBOKANI KASAYI 23ha Lubero 1/10/2006

8 Compagnie de Marie

notre dame

94ha Lubero 01/07/2003

9 MASTAKI

KALAMBIRE

65ha Kivira Butembo 02/08/2007

10 MAUNGA KIMBUTE 12ha Katolo

Musienene

01/07/2007

11 MAUNGA BATEMA 17ha Musienene 01/07/2007

13 KATSONGO

MUKONDA

16ha Kasitu-Kinane 01/09/2006

14 PALUKU

MUHONGYA

7ha Mwenga-

Kasinga

01/09/2006

15 KATSONGO

MUKONDA

18ha Isale 01/08/2006

16 KAMBALE VISO 133ha Lubero territory 14/06/2002

17 MUMBERE MUHESI

TELESPHORE

26ha Ngombe

vwandaghala

01/07/2003

18 KASEREKA

KATEMBO

90ha Mwenye Masehe 01/10/2003

19 KAMBALE

VIKALWE

33ha Lubero area 01/05/2001

20 KATEMBO

KAHEHERO

148ha mukonze 01/08/2001

21 KATEMBO

KAHEHERO

17ha Vukenge II 01/08/2001

22 KATEMBO

KAHEHERO

85ha Lubero territory 01/08/2001

23 KATEMBO

KAHEHERO


24 KATEMBO

KAHEHERO


49 | P a g e

25 MASIKA KAVALAMI 56ha Lubero territory 01/08/2001

26 KAMBALE

SIRHAKYAVHU

204ha Lubero area 01/02/2004

27 KATEMBO

SYASIMWA

156ha Musingi-Lwero 01/02/2004

28 NDUNGO

MANZEKELE

46ha Luongo 01/08/2003

29 KAHINDO

WASUKUNDI

60ha Kyangwali

Lubero

Mwenye Lubero

01/07/2003

30 Communauté baptiste

au centre de l’Afrique

CBCA

Katwa 01/02/2003

31 ISENGINGO

KAMBERE NGISE

84ha Biena Lubero 03/10/2005

32 KAKULE SIRIWAYO 34ha Munoli chefferie

de baswagha

01/7/2005

33 Famille NZOLI

KIMBESA

196ha Mutanga Lubero 09/05/2005

34 KATSUVA

MUGHANDA

21ha lubero 15/04/2005

35 Université adventiste de

Lukanga

39ha Lukanga Lubero 15/06/2005

36 MWAHULWA

KILIBA DAVID

150ha Luofu Lubero 17/06/2004

37 SIVIKWA

MWENGESYALI

94ha Q.Matembe, cel

Vusesa Butembo

01/05/2004

38 MUHINDO KOMBI 19ha - Luumishwa

Bbo town

10/05/2000

39 Communauté baptiste

au centre de l’Afrique

CBCA

10ha Institut

biblique de

Katwa

Katwa vutamirie 01/12/2000

40 KATEMBO KISOLU 45ha Kasugho Lubero territory 01/11/2003

41 KAMBALE

MUKEMBA

10ha - Lubero kavale

Kyabwe

01/03/2000

42 KATEMBO BANGA 103ha - Kirunggwe/Musindi 01/10/2002

43 MUHINDO

VANGANAYIRIRE

DAMIEN

10ha Mighobwe Mighobwe factory 01/11/2002

44 Diocèse de Butembo-

Beni

38ha Bbo Molongo hill 01/10/2002

45 KAMBALE

MAKAKALO

44ha - Mulongo/Kiragho 01/10/2002

46 KATEMBO

MBANGA

247ha - Kirungwe 01/08/2002

47 KAMBALE

NDAGHALA

164ha Lubero Kyavirimu /Lutambi 01/09/2000

48 Mission évangélique

des adventistes du 7e

jour

43ha Lubero Kyavirimu /Lutambi 01/09/2000

49 KATSONGO

MUKONDA

136ha - Mutundu 01/05/2000

50 SIVIKA

MWENGESYALI

45ha - Vusala Busesa 01/05/2000

50 | P a g e

51 KAMBERE

KIPUTSU

66ha - Bwambe-Busengwa 09/01/2001

52 KAMBALE

SAASITA

63ha BP313 Bbo Batangi 12/04/2000

53 Diocese de butembo-

Beni

68ha BP179Bbo Itundi-

Biongwe

12/04/2000

54 KATEMBO

KISOLU

45ha

kasugho Lubero territory 01/11/2003

TOTAL LAND IN

BUTEMBO AND

KAYNA

4120

Some comments:

For the areas cited above, we found out that an area of about 26000 ha was subject of

transaction. Once again, the territory of MASISI is leading with more than half of land sold,

registered and regularized of 15000 ha.

We must establish the correlation between the good representation of this territory in the

different different successive rebellions in the North province and the willingness to grab land

while taking advantage of all situations which are presents in order to reinforce land security

when they are in power.

If this correlation is established, we can very easily affirm that the land conflicts are also

among the causes of persistent wars and land insecurity in the North Kivu province.

Several people met during our investigations only wished that the transactions that have taken

place during the war period must be revisited given the circumstances in which they took

place.

51 | P a g e

VII. MOTIVATIONS OF ACTORS INVOLVED IN LAND GRABBING.

The actors have different and diversified motivating factors behind land grabbing. The following table recapitulates these different motivations

by actors.

TABLE N°______ : SUMMARY OF MOTIVATION ELEMENTS OF DIFFERENT ACTORS INVOLVED IN THE PROCESS OF

LAND GRABBING.

N° ACTORS MOTIVATIONS IMPLICATIONS ON LOCAL

COMMUNITIES

OBSERVATIONS.

POSITIVE NEGATIVE

1. The

government

(National and

provincial)

- Attract foreign investers

for capital fees/income.

- Make profitable land

poorly exploited.

- Expropriation of

local populations.

- Emergence of landless communities in certain

districts (Masisi and Rutshuru).

- Increase in number of armed groups and militias

for selfdefence.

- Create employment for

the population.

- A non qualified,

poorly remunerated

workforc by some big

entrepreneurs who

continue to exploit land

despite the crisis and

insecurity.

- Poor

proletarianization

of the population.

Rusthuru case.

- Its only the processing factories that employ

some workers.

- Agricultural entreprises prefer haveing exploiting

their transfers through local populations

sometimes on payment of some royalty or by

working at the same time on their perenial crops

destined for exportation.

- Give value to natural

resources which are

insufficient and not

exploited

- Development of local

community land

- Selling and

speculation around rural

land (More negative

than positive)

-Making poor

local

communities.

- Progressive

acquisition of land

by a certain

category (elites,

politicians and

intellectuals) and

- The poor farmers are tempted by money and

from the pressure of needs they are sometimes

forcedto sell their land for those without other

sources of income.

52 | P a g e

foreign

enterprises.

2. Foreign

enterprises

- Access cheap land.

- Expropriation of

land.

- Weak capacities of receiving countries to

valuably negotiate with the foreing entreprises.

- Take advantage of the

facilities offered by the

receiving country

(taxation, procedures and

judicial security…)

- Cration of a workforce

classe poorly paid anda

t the mercy of the

enterprises;

- The unionization is very weak and chronique

joblessness weakens the employees from any

claim. See reserves on job market.

- Invest in a

promising/rich sector

- Accumulation of

unexploited land

belonging to

farmers.

- These factors well marked in Rutshuru territy

and a part of Beni terrirory.

- Produce with minimum

cost for exportation

- Sometimes the

opening up of areas,

acces to basic social

infrastructure : health

centres, schools …

- Food insecurity

since the

production is

mainly for

exportation coffee,

papaine, cocoa,

quinquina, palm

oil…

Very few are in the food crop production and they

insufficiently produce them alongside the export

crops.

Unfulfiled promises by the entrepreneurs.

3. Acquirers - Invest in a promising

sector

- Constitution of land

reserves in certain

areas.

- Accumulation of

unexploited land

alongside farmer

land.

- Difficult acces to

land by local

communities.

- Acquisitions sometimes fraudulently of land

while manipulating law especiallcy around the

settler transfers and the CNKI transfer.

- Local culture of

presitge investment

especially on extensive

land for livestock rearing.

- Taking away of

large tracts of

arable land from

local populations.

- Poor exploitation or lack of exploitation of good

land at the expense of the local communitites.

53 | P a g e

4. Local elites - Valeur réfuge - Accumulation of

insufficient and

unexploited land

- Strong commercialization of land excludes the

vulnerabe and the poor in the competition.

- Anticiper sur un marché

porteur biocarburant,

carte de cargoodne

- Difficult acces to

land by the

vulnerable

populations and

driving them

away.

Potential risks in reoccurence of conflicts

emanating from the ever growing market for land

and renegotiating sale contracts by the future

generations of the present sellers, from where we

have resurgence of conflicts. Case of MASISI and

LUBERO.

5. Traditional

leaders/custom

ary chiefs ;

- The taste of luxury and

easy way of becoming

rich.

- Expropriation of

land sometimes

exploited by the

small-scale

farmers.

- The functionning, lack of accessibility and

complexity of the congolese judicial system offers

vey little opportunities for reclamation for farmers.

- Sometimes getting rid

of land under conflict.

- Expropriation of

farmers’ land.

- Big entrepreneurs lust for land in conflict since

they are very cheap.

- Sometimes the administration and judicial

officers amplify conflcts since they are the first

beneficiairis in cases of land conflicts.

- Customary power made

fragile

- In certain cases, the

emancipation of

populations under the

customary judgements.

-Suspicion vis-à-

vis customary

power.

- Tendency of going back to the administration

despite its weaknesses especially those who have

money to pay for the services.

54 | P a g e

VIII. LAND LEGISLATION IN THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO AND

ITS IMPLICATIONS ON FARMER LAND IN NORTH KIVU PROVINCE.

In this section, we are not presenting the shortcomings of the land law but rather to

highlighting its limits in order to consider the priority actions and strategies for the managers

and leaders of EAFF as well as of other actors involved in land.

There already exists abundant literature on this theme. We will limit ourselves here to the

salient aspects and try to complement these elements with new elements that should be noted

with the adoption by the Congolese National Assembly on land in the "Law on the Basic

Principles of agriculture" in this month of May 2011.

We note immediately that this law will wait until its promulgation by the President of the

Republic and will only take effect six months after its promulgation, refer to article 86 of the

said law.

We thought worthwhile to make reference to a study we conducted in the month July 2009 in

the activity building program FAT, a study undertaken in collaboration with GRET, Group

for Research and Technological Exchange, the Forum of Friends of FAT Earth and the CCFD

Catholic Committee against Hunger and for Development.

Being in the coordinating team of this study, it allows us to take the elements identified by it

to this point.

These elements are still relevant in the extent that we do not have any more that is recent that

would contradict them. However, we felt as mentioned above that we should integrate the

new agricultural law which has just been adopted.

We will also make reference to the code of good conduct of chiefs which is being debated in

the provincial assembly in North Kivu, even if it is not yet adopted by the provincial

legislature. It has already passed the debate, what remains is the adoption article by article

before being passed and promulgated by the provincial governor.

The analysis of land management system will enable us to identify the various obstacles

encountered by the small-scale producer against other players land. It may also identify gaps

and elements that facilitate land ownership phenomenon and massive concentration of land by

large-scale farmers at the expense of small-scale farmers in North Kivu province.

VIII.1. The position of two land management systems

1.1. Complex and unenforced laws

Land legislation, despite the promulgation of the various sections, has changed little since the

last thirty (30) years.

55 | P a g e

It currently represents a bottleneck on the one hand to the resolution and conflict prevention

and on the other hand to the development of the country.

The historical development of land legislation/law

Land legislation of the DRC has been defined by a series of successive pieces of legislation;

the most critical are those of 1966, 1971, 1973, 1980. They highly affirmed the property

ownership of the state lands, while ensuring the security of property rights assigned to

persons (physically or morally) in the form of concessions, more or less durable or even

perpetual.1 »

- The colonial period and private ownership

Before independence, the colonial state had all rights on "Belgian Congo" land and the

issue of land and property is governed by the provisions of Book II of the Belgian

Civil Code which enshrines in particular the private ownership of land.

Two orders (from 30 September 1922 and May 31, 1934) establish the procedure to be

followed before any disposal (transfer act involving the property2) or lease of land

(transfer act involving the right of use). These two ways of access to property was

carried on public lands and were granted according to the districts and the size of

funds involved or by the King of Belgium or by provincial governors, or by custodian

of title deeds.

The procedure was "to find vacant land required for transfer or lease and the nature

and extent of rights that the local community could have on these lands." From the

onset until its conclusion, this study involved the political, administrative customary

and legal authorities. So there was at that time legal measures which would be used to

enforce occupancy rights of "indigenous people" and to organize a system of

ownership in their favour. However, although this was supposed to protect the rights

of the population this was rarely respected.

« Thus, for the lands under their management, administrative authorities were issuing

various titles either to have right of property for funds or building or to prove the

transfer of use of such property. Among these titles, there were certificates of

registration and landlord’s book. In addition, it was possible to obtain on the land

occupied by local communities use rights from the leaders of these communities, and

that, following a contract of sale for a consideration or for free» 3.

In Kivu, we have seen this in a previous chapter; the monopoly of land management is

assigned to the National Committee of Kivu (CNKI). And therefore during

independence, four types of land were recognized:

o « 1 ° indigenous lands governed by customs and local practices;

o 2 ° registered land governed by Book II of the Belgian Civil Code;

o 3 ° lands occupied in native towns and non-traditional centres governed by

local administrative law;

o 4 ° vacant land 4. »

- Post-colonial period

1 MATHIEU P., MAFIKIRI TSONGO A., op. cit.

2 MALERE MUDEKEREZA, G., La problématique de la survivance des anciens titres de propriété foncière et

immobilière en droit congolais, RCN Justice et démocratie Bulletin n ° 27 Premier trimestre 2009, Droit Foncier 3 BUCYALIMWE MARARO, S., Pouvoirs, élevage bovin et la question foncière au Nord-Kivu, Anvers, 2001, p.31

4 PALUKU KITAKYA, A. Interactions entre la gestion foncière et l’économie locale en région de Butembo, Nord-

Kivu, République Démocratique du Congo, Thèse de doctorat, Louvain-la-Neuve, 2007, p. 289

56 | P a g e

Between 1960 and 1966, the new independent state initially got tin its account existing

land legislation according to which land acquired privately is outside the jurisdiction

of the state. So in Kivu management of land rights, forestry and mining is transferred

to the Belgium-African of Kivu (SOBAKI) thus excluding the Congolese state.

o 1966: The Congolese government puts an end to a colonial land laws. By

Ordinance-Law No. 66-343 of 7 June 1966, named "Bakajika law," the

Republic of Congo (Zaire) takes over all land, forestry and mining rights

granted or assigned during colonization.

o 1971: two laws (Law No. 71-008 and No. 71-009 of 31 December 1971) containing

the amendment the Constitution, states (Article 10) that "the soil and under

soil/underground of Zaire and their natural products belong to State ".

o 1973: Law No. 73-021 of 20 July 1973 on the general property, real estate and land

tenure and security regime is adopted. It reaffirms the principle in 1966 according to

which "the ground is wholly owned and inalienable by the State" (Art. 53), which only

grants the participating rights in the form of concessions to individuals physically or

morally5.

o 1980: in the middle of "making of Zaire" the Law No. 80-008 of 18 July 1980 amends

and supplements Law No. 73-021 which focuses on the transformation in perpetuating

all rights to land acquired by "Zairians” before 1980. "Any right to own land that was

acquired regularly by Zairians, individuals, before the entry into force of this Act, is

converted, provided that it has been materialized by valorization which complies with

laws and regulations in a perpetual franchise fee [...] "(Article 4 amending Article 369

of Law No. 73-021).

Law No. 73-021 of 20 July 1973 on the general property, land tenure and property security regime is

considered the fundamental text of land legislation in the DRC.

To date, all the texts supplementing Law No. 73-021 are the Land Code of the DRC. They are

published in the special issue of the Official Journal of 5 April 20066.

VIII.2: FUNDAMENTAL LEGISLATION ON FARMING.

Fundamental legislation on farming aims at formulating policies concerning acquisition and

distribution of farming land, cessation of land ownership rights and ways of resolving

conflicts arising from land ownership. All these issues are covered in chapter two of this new

law on farming.

We examine various policy issues as adopted by the National Assembly during the ordinary

session of March, 2011 dated 4 / May / 2011.

Section 1: Distribution of farming land

Article 23

Farming land is granted to farmers as specified in the law on land distribution and ownership.

Article 24

The farming contract determines the types of crops to be grown by the concessionaire.

5 MAFIKIRI TSONGO A., op.cit., in De VILLERS G. (dir.), Phénomènes informels et dynamiques croplles en

Afrique, Cahiers africains/Africa studieux, n°19-20, 1996, pp.46-62. 6 Journal Officiel de la RDC, Code foncier, n° spécial, 5 avril 2006, p. 24.

57 | P a g e

It also determines the minimum production levels to be attained by the farmer.

Article 25

Rights on the acquired farming land by virtue of usage are exercised in accordance with the

law.

The local communities practice farming activities, pasture growing and leaving it fallow.

Section 2: Cessation of land rights

Article 28

Farming concessions are transferable in accordance with the law.

Section 3: Land leasing

Article 29

According to the present legislation, land leasing is governed by the common law.

Article 30

The farming concessionaire has the right to rent at least two thirds of his concession to

another party. The concessionaire must notify the local administration of this step.

The concessionaire together with the tenant takes full responsibility for this process and is

answerable to the state for the signed obligations in the farming contract.

For this case, concession can be either be the object of land lease or lease with tenant farming,

and should conform to the law and state land lease regulations.

Article 31

When the farming concession is rent out, the tenant benefits from the right of preemption in

case of cessation provided he has a not emphasized the agricultural concession.

Section 4: Agricultural land conflicts

Article 32

Conflicts arising from ownership of agricultural land of the local communities can only be

addressed by judicial authorities if they were subjected beforehand to the conciliation

procedure, on the initiative of one of the parties before the provincial advisory organ or that of

decentralized territorial entity envisaged in article 4(15).

Article 33

The reconciliation procedure breaks the limitation period envisaged in the common law from

the reception of the request for reconciliation by the provincial advisory organ or that of a

decentralized territorial entity envisaged in article 4 (15).

In case reconciliation does not take place, the case is brought, by the active party, to the

hearing of a more competent jurisdiction within three months from the reception of a verbal

trial of non-reconciliation.

This same law also envisages in article 17 that nothing should be expropriated by lands

acquired on the basis of the law or taken advantage of on the basis of public interest.

These different dispositions are, to a large extent, likely to complete and improve the land

system in force in DRC.

.

VIII.3. LEGISLATION GOVERNING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE

CUSTOMARY LEADERS AND THE FARMERS IN THE NORTHERN PROVINCE

OF KIVU

At provincial level, another initiative of law, popularly known as ‘a decree’ is being discussed

in northern Kivu province assembly. This decree initiated by the Forum des Amis de la Terre

(F.A.T) is an experimental project driven by the customary leaders in land management. On

the whole, the following dispositions are to take into account the security of the small farmers

58 | P a g e

and apply to the customary leaders, land owners, agrarian farmers and other participants in the

agricultural sector.

It also highlights the rights and duties of customary leaders, land owners, farmers and the

administrative systems.

Article 9 stipulates this ‘The customary leaders have the right to participate in preliminary

enquiries of the envisaged concession articles 193 - 203 of law N º 73/021 of July 20th, 1973

as changed this day’.

For the duties of the customary leaders, article 19 highlights what follows: ‘In case it proved

that the landowning leader is involved in either way, closely or from a distance, directly or

indirectly with the reasons of the conflict which drove led to the commotion, the losing party

and/or if need be, both parties lodge a complaint before competent judicial organs’.

The losing party has the right to an equivalent indemnity as the landowning leader. It is illegal

for land owning leaders to sell the already allocated land. The ultimate initiative of land sale

must come from the farmer and the landowning leader (Art 32).

The biggest feature and innovation to be acknowledged in this legislation is the clear place of

women as far as the land question is concerned. In fact, in article 22, it is recorded:

‘Customary leaders must enforce the law that discourages them and others from practicing

any discriminating tendencies which prevent women from owning natural resources

especially land. Consequently, these leaders should put in place measures that will facilitate

land ownership by women achieve.’

As can be seen, DRC already has a juridical mechanism which should be known, understood

and taken advantage of/exploited.

VIII.4.THE CHARACTERISTICS OF LAND SYSTEM IN FORCE

The Land Code published in the Official Gazette in April 2006 is a document of 99 pages. Law No.

73-021, which alone has 399 articles, is a procedural document and complex.

The land tenure system is characterized as follows:

- The State is the sole owner of all land. The state nationalized “made public” all lands

including the so-called "indigenous land". Article 387 in fact defines that "the land occupied

by local communities become from the entry into force of this Act, public lands."

- Land property no longer exists: the land rights granted by the State to individuals in the form

of concessions are rights of use. The granting of the latter is subject to the development of

land, according to those rights.

Thus, as explained by Professor Rochegude, in the Congolese land system there is no

"opposition between public law and land right”. What exists is "only one category, public

lands, which provides access to land rights which are never property in the civil sense"7.

Besides this, the issue of customary rights remains omnipresent.

The state land which consists of public lands includes a public and a private domain.

The public domain "consists of all land for public use or service" (Art. 55): bed of lakes, rivers,

waters, etc.

The private domain is composed of "all other lands" outside the public domain. The rights of

use of such land shall be granted to either public or private persons with a certificate of

registration which serves as the basis for the establishment of a perpetual, ordinary or service

lease. The free concession or concession without charges is "the contract by which the state

recognizes a community, a physical or moral individual with public or private right, rights of

7 ROCHEGUDE, A., PLANCON, C., « Décentralisation, acteurs locaux et foncier », Fiche pays : République

Démocratique du Congo, Comité Technique foncier et développement, 2009, p.15.

59 | P a g e

use" (Article 61). The conditions for awarding concessions vary according to (1) the land size

requested for and (2) to whether they are rural or urban (that is to say included in the of an

entity declared urban)8.

Law No. 73-021 specifies the procedures for awarding concessions: the awarding of a

concession is subject to an investigation commonly called. "Vacant land survey" designed to

"ascertain the nature and extent of the rights that third parties could have on land under

request for concession" (Article 193). It includes: "no 1: On-site verification of the

delimitation of the land requested, [...] no 4: the hearing of those voice their complaints or

comments/demands verbally, [...]" (Art 194). This investigation is "conducted by the

Commissioner of area or by an officer or civil servant in the Commissioner office" in the rural

area and this is the "agricultural officer" who undertakes the investigation.

“The lands that are part of the private domain of the state are urban or rural" (Art. 60).

- Urban farms such as described in Act No. 73-021 located in the urban constituencies;

- Rural land is the “remaining” land after subtraction of urban land. They are:

o lands granted,

o Land allocated to the public domain

o land occupied by local communities.

Confusion relating to customary rights:

One of the main sources of confusion induced by Act No. 73-021 addresses the "customary

law" and the conditions on which to base a concession right. Indeed, the land occupied and

used by local communities "individually or collectively, in accordance with local customs and

practices" (Art. 388) are in the private domain of the State. In addition, "The rights of use

lawfully acquired on these lands will be regulated by an Order of the President of the

Republic" (Art. 389). This ordinance was never enacted and has therefore, left the customary

land rights in a state of confusion and uncertainty.

Thus,

- On one hand, the law removes the management of land from the traditional authorities.

- Secondly, the lack of an order of the President of the Republic suggests that the land occupied

"in accordance with local customs and practices" still fall within the customary law.

For Professor Mugangu Matabaro, the ambiguity of customary rights is threefold:

1. in the legal regime of the land, that is to say the rules applicable to these lands, 2. level of

management authority, 3. at the nature of the rights of farmers.. »

In fact, to Matthew Paul, the "legal loophole" makes the customary rights "vulnerable

compared to other rights (mainly the concessions granted to private individuals) whose

procedures and written sureties are explicitly defined».

Procedures not followed

The procedure for granting a concession is long, complex and subject to corruption. The most

fundamental point of the procedure for consideration and respect for customary rights is

unfortunately one that is often sloppy. This is the "initial inquiry into the concession."

It is common to have false inquiries undertaken with or without complicity by the customary

or administrative authorities.

8 ROCHEGUDE, A., PLANCON, C., op. cit.

60 | P a g e

The modalities/procedures for awarding concessions are a favorable ground for all kinds of

manipulations. In fact according to the size and location of land applied for, the competent

authorities are not the same (see table below). In practice, sometimes concessions covering

large areas are granted from the capital without informing the populations and less still calling

for enquiries to find out if the land is vacant. .

Competent Authority Acreage granted

Rural lands Urban lands

Parliament ≥ 2000 ha ≥ 100 ha

President of the Republic > 1000 ha et < 2000 ha > 50 ha et < 100 ha

Ministry of Land Affaires > 200 ha et ≥ 1000 ha > 10 ha et ≤50 ha

Governor of the Province ≤ 200 ha ≤ 10 ha

Conservator of Land Titles < 10 ha <50 a

Similarly, occupants not aware of the applications for concessions by a third party can not

assert their right in period of two (2) years allotted for this purpose. After two years, the

certificate of registration becomes unassailable. "The actions against him are pitiful, even if it

is received by mistake, surprise or fraud9 ». Obviously these actions are often lengthy and

costly and are rarely accessible to the occupants.

Even beyond violations of the law, conducting inquiries in rural areas pose real technical

problems because on the one hand, of the vast area of land and secondly, the lack of qualified

persons to undertake this.

Confusion on the "survival" of ancient title deeds and documents issued by third parties

If the Act provides for the conversion, in perpetuity, the land rights legally obtained before

1980, in practice, users continue to produce old documents to try to justify their right to

occupy land or a house. This is the landlord book, the land form, the allotment certificate, the

certificate of right of occupation or even the sale agreement from a traditional chief.

Yet according to article 390 of Law No. 73-021 "From the commencement of this Act," the

right of occupancy "found by" the landlord’s book "or equivalent to a title issued in a town or

area of the Republic is abolished. "

Thus, only the landlord books and other documents before the entry into force of the Land

Act are eligible for access to the right in perpetuity. The documents issued after that date by

the registrar of real estate properties do not in principle have legal value.

However, as explained by Professor Mugangu Matabaro, "these provisions are often ignored

by the land authorities as well as the local territorial authorities (Mayors, territorial

administrators, leaders, chiefs of sectors, groups, localities), which, according to practice,

"regulate" contradicting situations to the law or simply attribute without having knowledge

issue titles of land" (fragmented records)».

9 MUGANGU MATABARO S., op. cit., p. 30.

61 | P a g e

Lack of systematic conversion of the old land titles (those prior to 1973), without training nor

awareness, often ill-informed users are vulnerable: they hide behind documents that do not or

no longer secure them.

The range of codes

Parallel to the Land Code, there is a DRC Mining Code and a Forest Code, each having a

different a register. These complex codes also fall sometimes in competition with the land

tenure system.

The Mining Code was established by the Act No. 007/2002 of 11 July 2002, and

specified by the Implementing Decree No. 038/2003 of 26 March 2003, with mining

regulations.

According to the Mining Code, the State owns the minerals both on the earth surface

and under the earth surface.

It states among other things that rights under a mining concession are distinct from

those of a land concession.

o It is a matter of different allusions to private property even though it is non-

existent in Law No. 73-021. It is in fact a matter in Article 132 of the "owner

of land."

o Access to mineral resources is subject to the prior consent of the "owner" or

legal occupier. Once established, "the owner or lessee is, expected to repair the

damages caused by the work, and even authorized, to perform as part of his

mining activities" (Art. 280). Similarly, if the land is rendered unfit for culture,

the "rights holders" of land must be compensated.

o In case of dispute, the Mining Code provides for the settlement "by all non-

judicial remedies, including transaction, compromise, and arbitration or

before a judicial police officer or a public officer».

As is the case for land code, procedures to recognize the rights of local populations

which therefore hinder the granting of mining concessions are rarely implemented.

Beyond the manipulation, identification of rights holders is difficult because (1) they

generally have no document to assert their rights and (2) the mining sites are often

remote enclosed areas where there social structure is not well elaborated and hence

where traditional authorities are less present.

As a result, and in practice, persons granted a mining concession on lands not subject

to any registration with the land administration see their rights as secure. This is why

the people believe that mining legislation prevails over land rights.

The Forest Code was established by Law No. 011/2002 of 29 August 2002 and

supplemented by various implementing regulations put together in a special issue of

the Official Gazette of November 6, 2002.

According to the Forest Code, "forests are the property of the State" (Art. 7).

o Forests are in three categories:

� classified forests in the public domain of the State;

� protected forests (not classified) in the private domain of the State and

may be subject to concessions excluding any real right in land ;

� forests for permanent production.

o Local communities can obtain a concession or part of protected forest in areas

"lawfully possessed under the custom" (Article 22)

62 | P a g e

o "The natural or planted forests included in land granted under the land laws

belong to their dealers. - The rights to these forests are exercised in

compliance with the provisions of this Act and its implementing measures

"(Article.8)

The classification of forests is done by the Ministry of Environment, Nature

Conservation and Tourism. Local communities occupying the forests are often

classified in a certain class in the capital. They are victims of the myth that "forests are

empty."

VIII.5. THE CHANGING PRACTICES AND CUSTOMS

A number of land conflicts in the DRC and Kivu are related to (1) the ignorance of local

customs or lack of consideration of these customs in policies and (2) to customary changes

which have occurred in history. Customs have changed; traditional authorities have acquired

new powers which have all contributed to social change particularly in the rural areas.

The different visions of the land as the origin of conflicts

The different visions of the land of the actors in Congo explains in part the land conflicts.

There are:

- (1) An opposition between the “customary” vision and the “civil” vision of land. In

Congo generally, the civil notions of « private property », of « vacant land and without

owners » introduced by the colonizer is opposed to as compared to the customary

vision in which land belongs to the community.

- (2) An opposition between the indeginous peoples vision and that of the migrant

populations. In Kivu in particular the different visions identified different strategies of

access to land.

For indigenous people in Kivu, "the sense of territory is defined by the relationship between

ethnicity, authority (tribal chief) and a portion of space. Access to land is inseparable from

the participation in a network of social relations. " In receiving land, beneficiary person is

subject to obligations of loyalty embodied by various tributes and levies and the provision of

services to traditional authorities.

For migrant populations, including the Banyarwanda, land is an object of individual

development devoid of personal relationships.

o In Kivu, the non-recognition by the migrants of social dependency on

traditional leaders has been a source of indigenous land disputes in the fifties.

In a simplified way, migrants do not consider themselves as belonging to the

local community (and/or is not considered by the natives as their own) did not

recognize customary authority and thus free from all responsibility and loyalty

to them.

o The need for social independence vis-à-vis the indigenous chiefs will lead

some migrants, legitimate or not, to use land law to access to land. According

to this legislation, the piece of titled land is out of the jurisdiction of chiefs.

The holder of the property doesn’t have recognition or responsibility towards

the traditional authorities. And we must remember that they obtain titles in

order to escape the authority of traditional leaders in land matters. Refer to

63 | P a g e

table number; CNKI block already presented and the table on lands that are

object of transactions for the 2000- 2010 period.

Land is not seen in the same way by all the actors. This is why, in terms of these visions, the

actors will base themselves on different strategies in order to access land.

• For some, land is not an independent object, but constitutes an inseparable object from

the relation with the community. The management of use rights which apply to these

land is done by the customary authorities. Land doesn’t belong to one person and is

not subject for sale. With this vision, the actors access use rights vie customary

procedures.

• For others, land is a stand alone object, clearly distinct from social considerations

(always contradicting) and destined for valorization. Land is an object for sale and

could actually be bought or sold. With this vision, actors are distant from social

customary considerations while accessing land privately and use rights through the

land legislation/law.

With history and together with current realities, these differing perceptions on land are

opposing and are a source of land conflicts in the DRC.

Local community land practices in North Kivu

The local indeginous populations are mainly from Nande, Nyanga, Tembo and Hunde tribes.

In the customary land design notably of the Nande, land belongs to the whole community and

territory management is done by royal families at the clan or supraclan level10

. The socio-

political power (Vwami) is held by a triumvirat composed of a religious chief (Mukulu), a

political chief (Mwami), and a military chief (Ngabwe) all belonging to the same fratrie and

the land power is on the religious chief, le mukulu and other different land chiefs (Bakama).

The Bakamas are descendants of «recognized families established long time ago in the

country who are believed to be the first occupants of the land, during the very first migration

» they « are members of Mwami lineage who have acquired customarily specific land

prerogatives ». «It is them who redistribute land to other members of the community ».

Communities therefore access land use rights according to the principles of a society lineae:

from father to son. Women are excluded from land inheritance. One of the reasons given is

that women are married and would transfer land rights to her husband and hence to another

family.

For different reasons (economic, social and political), in selling land, the customary

authorities (whether one of the members of truimvirat or Bakama) have contributed to the

questioning of the customary practice and therefore has been a source, historically, of land

conflicts.

With their role, whether known or not, it is difficult to identify exactly who, in the customary

power organization made decisions which would go against the custom. It would seem that

the selling of customary land is done at different levels of the customary power chain. If the

situation varies from clan to clan, then different studies mention the Mwami (politcal chiefs)

as being the main people responsible for customary actions.

Generally, today, the guarantors of custom/tradition: «customary chiefs play lesser role as

guarantors of customry rights and are more of colluders with modern, commercial, political,

administrative elites since they currently depend on traditional chiefs to maintain their

statusand them for their revenue »11

10

PALUKU KITAKYA, A. op. cit., p. 289. 11

MATHIEU P., MAFIKIRI TSONGO A., op. cit.

64 | P a g e

Redirecting the land management powers of the customary authorities

The land legislation:

- Withdraws from the customary authorities their power of customary land

management. However, by default, the « legal void » gives them a certain legitimacy

in management of rural lands not concessioned by the land administration.

- Takes away from customary chiefs their rights to land ; the concessionors are not

legally bound to them.

- Excludes customary chiefs from their power of management and thus their rights to

royalties on rural land became urban land.

Therefore the traditional authorities are gradually moved from their (1) right to

manage land which is one of the foundations of the custom and (2) their source of

income constitution these charges.

The role of customary authorities in the territorial administration

Since colonization, traditional authorities have been equipped with particular functions in

administration.

- The colonial state gave them the authority to preside over the customary tribunals to

Mwami (the recognized and integrated authority in the judicial constitution of the

state).

- In 1973, the Bamis became the community chiefs and thus official elements in the

administrative and command chains of the capital in the rural areas

- In the same period, they became presidents of the unique party MPR in the

communities.

The 2006 constitution reaffirms the administrative role of the Mwamis. They are the chiefs of

the decentralized entity: chiefdom. The chief of the chiefdom is “designated by the local

custom with respect to the law on the status of customary chiefs” then included in the

Gorvenor of the Province (Art. 67 and 80 of the organic law n° 08/016 of 07 october 2008 on

composition, organisation and functioning of the Decentralized Territorial Entitiies and their

relations with the State and the Provinces). «the limits […] of the chiefdoms are fixed by the

Prime Minister’s Decree taken on the proposal of the Minister of Republic and internal

affairs in its powes, with assent from the Provincial Assembly ».

The leadership bodies are: the council of chiefs whose members are elected on universal

suffrage and the executif electoral body composed of the chief of the chiefdom without

mentionning any land according to Article 84 of the Law mentioned earlier. « ensures to […]

b) safeguarding heritage and, especially: […] b. management area/ domain; ».

The roles and responsabilites of the chief of chiefdom and the customary chief (Mwami) are

elements of confusion for the local populations.

The customary authorities progressively acted as “extensions of the state” which (have as

consequence an antagonizing process between the customary authority and its social

foundations in local communities, and a social transformation in rural areas »12

VIII.6. PARTIAL CONCLUSION

12

VAN ACKER, V., La « pembénisation » du Haut-Kivu : opportunisme et droits fonciers revisités.

65 | P a g e

According to Professor Mugangu Matabaro «the land problem in eastern DRC is

fundamentally in terms of management, and that is to say, the legal status of exploiters on the

one hand and the institutional framework of management on the other hand ».

Two systems of land management coexist in Congo:

- A legal system for the implementation of Land Code, however, it has been heavily

ciritized for many years because:

o Certain complex provisions are not applicable

o Source of confusion (though translated in local languages), for the users and

the administrative authorities who are charged with its application.

- Local and customary practices. Faced with cumbersome and costly official security

procedures, and given the "legal vacuum" of customary rights, local actors develop

and use the means of securing land alongside the Act. These practices allow

recognition and securing local transactions and access to land. However these:

o Are extremely fragile in the context (1) high pressure on land as in Kivu and

(2) challenging the customary authorities,

o do not preserve the populations of attempted robberies from external and local

actors to their advantage and sometimes fraudulently legal procedures.

Currently, neither of the two management systems ensures security of land belonging

to the poorest.

One of the key issues of land issue in DRC and Kivu in particular is to develop a

system which combines traditional practices of land access and administrative

management regulated by law.

IX. REGIONAL, CONTINENTAL AND INTERNATIONAL INITIATIVES:

Some initiatives to limit or counter large scale land grabbing are taken from here and

there but without real impact on the lives of small-scale producers en DRC.

We present in this paragraph what the leaders of some organizations need to know in order to

integrate them in their struggle and get maximize profits that they offer.

1. The charter of the SADC states in management of natural resources including land.

2. Very recently, the Dakar Declaration, made by the world at the World Social Forum that

just took place in Dakar in February 2011.

3. . African Unity declaration for the management of natural resources, including land. The

code of good conduct and guidelines for transparency and accountability on land issues in the

third world countries.

4. The volunteers’ directives that FAO and the UN are establishing through major

consultations with all stakeholders: political, economic and the civil society.

5. It should be noted here "PIDESC" International Covenant on Social and cultural

Rights which is a tool that some players want to put in place to force the states who have

signed this pact of voluntary directives to comply with and implement these

commitments. This complement to the pact, like the others is far from being signed by the

States concerned.

The greatest weakness we can not in relation to these initiatives is that they are voluntary in

nature and therefore are not binding for the states and the various signatories.

66 | P a g e

X. CASES OF FARMERS STRUGGLE THAT CAN SERVE AS EXAMPLES OF

DEFENDING LAND RIGHTS.

67 | P a g e

XI. CASES THAT CAN SERVE AS EXAMPLES OF FIGHTING FOR DEFENDING OF SMALLSCALE FARMER LAND RIGHTS

IN NORTH KIVU PROVINCE.

Note: This list is not exhaustive. It is for illustrative purposes that we decided to integrate this small paragraph, to show the many readers

and actors that there exists in the province examples that can serve as future actions to be undertaken in a much broader program. There are

certainly many other more interesting cases than those we presented here. The various EAFF officials together with its members must make an

effort to identify, add value and develop and strengthen them if necessary

.

N° ACTORS EXPERIENCE OBSERVATIONS

LOCAL CIVIL SOCIETY INITIATIVES

1. SYDIP - Codification of principles of customary land.

- Training of rural paralegals

- Legal support in courts and tribunals.

Many communities now have the customary principles

codified. This avoids manipulations and doubtful

interpretations by the different actors through the decrease in

oral operations.

2. AAP - Legal support for the vulnerable in courts.

- Have in place a CEJ – Centre for Legal

Justice.

- Land security through supporting the

vulnerable in the process for obtaining legal

documents

Enriching experience where they focused on the peaceful

resolution of conflicts through Centers for Legal Counseling

3. FOPAC - Training of rural

- Lobbying around the agriculture code

- Supporting the process of installing CARGs

in the territories and communities in the

province

- Good coalition strategy with other land actors both

government and civil society.

- Multifaceted approach from legal support to technical

support in protection and conservation of soil and

agricultural production.

- The agricultural code has been adopted by the Congolese

National Assembly.

4. F.AT. - Lobbying around the land laws, agricultural

Code at the national level

- More oriented towards lobbying and advocacy in order to

have more equitable laws in management of land by

68 | P a g e

- Lobbying around the improvement of

customary practices in land issues through

having in place the Code of Conduct for

traditional leaders in land management.

- Several surveys and studies around the land

issues.

-Support in networking of actors in land issues

in the province through the CECAF –

Framework for Exchange and Dialogue for

Land Actors in North Kivu.

government authorities. Agricultural Code recently adopted

by the national assembly as the code of good conduct for the

traditional leaders in land matters, has been treated by the

provincial assembly. It is scheduled for adoption in June.

- Good networking initiative for land actors in the province.

- Good collaboration between the government authorities

and customary leadership.

5. CECAF - Network of local actors involved in land in

North Kivu province

- Initiative still young but promising as it can help avoid

duplication, creating positive synergies and harmonization of

interventions as well as the implementation of common

strategies around key provincial issues and problems

6. UWAKI - Put in place dialogue committees around the

land issues in the territories.

- Defend the women land rights.

- Dialogue committees to give support especially in terms of

gender and access by women to land.

7. LOFEPACO - Defending women land rights. -Training of women leaders for lobbying in gender and

women acces to land.

8. ASP - Conflict resolution through legal support for

the vulnerable in the courts and tribunals.

- Several studies on land problem/issue in

Masisi territory;

- Peaceful conflict resolution approach at the local level.

9. PREPYG - Defending land rights for the pygmy people - Good initiative for these marginalized people and whose

land rights are violated and land grabbed by other people.

10. APRODEPED - Securing land through by supporting the

vulnerable in acquiring land documents/titles.

-Training of leaders and customary chiefs on

matters relating to land.

- Good approach of integration and bringing together of

customary chiefs and the leaders of the people.

11. CACUDEKI - Training of paralegals and customary chiefs

in land issues.

- Good initiative in bringing together the administration, the

customary leaders and the populations.

69 | P a g e

GOVERNMENT INITIATIVES

12. STAREC - Conflict resolution through putting in place of

CFLPs - Local Land Committees for conflict

resolution and Peace.

- Government initiative for peace in the East of D.R.C.

INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND UNITED NATIONS SYSTEMS INITIATIVES.

13. UN HABITAT - Conflit resolution through having in place

local committees for land reconciliation.

- Coordination national and international land

actors clusters at the provincial level.

- Interesting support in that it builds the existing local

dynamics instead of investing directly in the resolution of

conflicts on the ground.

- Good initiative for defending the land rights of the

displaced and refugee populations

14. NRC - Land conflict resolution through putting in

place of local committees in charge of conflict

resolution.

- Defending the rights of the displaced and the

refugees

- Good initiaitive that complements UN HABITAT.

- an effective collaboration with local organizations is still

necessary.

15. H.C.R - Defending refugee land rights - Internation initiative specialized in defending the rights of

refugees. Putting in place committees for refugees.

XII. SOME RECOMMENDATIONS AND STRATEGIES PROPOSED TO THE LEADERS OF EAFF FOR FIGHTING AGAINST

LAND GRABBING.

N° ACTORS STRATEGIES AND POLICIES

70 | P a g e

LOCAL NATIONAL REGIONAL INTERNATIONAL

1. Government - Collect

comprehensive

information for its

efficient use.

- undertake lobbying for

decentralization.

- Be integrated and

participate in the work of

the different reform

commissions and put in plac

laws on land and other

natural resources. Law on

land, animal rearing,

fisheries etc.

- Create alliances

with other

organizations and

initiatives not only

for signing

agreements and

pacts but for their

effective

application.

Same as the regional level

- Participate in

decentalized land

management organs.

- Build alliances with other

actors in order to have more

force including government

organs.

- engage with

regional

organizations for

powerful lobbying

at this level.

Collaboration with international

organizations and make use of

international tools for protection

smallscale farmer land rights.

- Build capacities of

local organizations so

they can demand

accountability from

the local leaders.

- Insist on the application

and respecting of

agreements and covenants

that the country has signed.

- Disseminate the various

national and international

tools ;

- Disseminate and

make use of all the

opportunities

(regional

organizations, pacts

and agreements) for

smallscale farmers’

land rights.

Same as the regional level

2. Companies/enterprises. Build capacities of

farmer organizations

and unions to assert

their legitimate rights

on land.

- Learn about the congolese

and other tax facilities

Collaborate with

other farmer

organizations in the

region in order to

make use of the

OHADA system in

order to understand

the acquisition

- Undertake lobbying for the

accountability and transparency in

the land market in DRC in

particular and in Africa generally.

ILC « International Land

Coalition » is particularly active

in this and can be a good

partner/ally.

71 | P a g e

mecanism of land

markets.

Build negotiation

capacities for

developement and

investment proposals

by the enterprises.

Develop a set of

specification for

community

development.

Undertake lobbying for

more justice and equity

among the indeigenous

populations.

Develop professional

unionists where job

are offered by the

established

enterprises/companies.

Put in place conditions for

qualified local workforce.

3. Purchasers/buyers Negotiating for

valuing by the local

communities of

regular and legally

acquired concessions.

Insist on a land reformE for

the recovery of land

fraudulently acquired.

Organize and

African campaign

for the rights of

indeginous people

on their resources

and especially land

resource.

To do lobbying for the respect of

guidelines and principles of

equity and morality and especially

for the European companies

A coexistence pact

between the large and

small scale operators

in the rural areas.

Insist of regularizing if not

fair and equitable

compensation by the

acquirers/purchasers.

As above. Collaborate with organizations

from the North for lobbying in

order to preserve the country’s

land for general development of

the DRC.

4. Local elite Build capacities for

negotiation of

contracts for untapped

concessions.

Insist om more just and

equitable laws which

prevents concentration of

land among a few political,

72 | P a g e

economic or intellectual

elite.

Undertake a

systematic census of

non exploited

concessions while

indicating their

owners. (This study

has just produced a

draft).

Which civil society to insist

on accountability of leaders.

?

Insist on mandatory

declaration of property by

public servants before

taking office.

?

5. Customary chiefs. Insist on respecting of

customary principles

in the management of

customary land.

Redefine the role of

customary chiefs in land

management.

Who in the

countries have been

able to improve the

role and status of

the customary

chiefs?

Support the putting in

place of local land

commissions or the

CCL as provided for

by the agricultural

code.

Support FAT efforts in

putting in place a good code

of conduct for the

customary chiefs for land

management.

Associate ANATC

with other activities of

smallscale farmer

organizations.

Collaborate with ANATC –

National Alliance for

Traditional Authorities in

Congo.

5. Smallscale farmer

organizations.

Strengthen local

actors in monitoring

Put in place and streghnthen

a farmer movement at the

Connect big farmer

federations with to

73 | P a g e

of land transactions, in

land registry

national level as is the case

in other countries.

other movements in

other countries.

Have in place a specialized

service for lobbying in the

farmer organisations

especially those at the

regional and national level.

Establish a regional

office or an

observation

mechanism for land

grabbing in the

developing

countries DRC

included.

74 | P a g e

XIII. SOME BUSINESS MODELS BETWEEN FARMER ORGANIZATIONS

AND OTHER ACTORES IN LAND GRABBING PHENOMENON.

Several elements of models have already been mentioned in the paragraph of

strategies and policies. The following aspects should, however, be highlighted:

There is no one large-scale acquisition, concentration, ownership known as land grab

which is the only model for production model. Several other models exist and can be

experimented on in DRC in general and in North Kivu in particular. They are:

1. Making available to locals land and their lease by businesses. This system

allows the farmers to retain ownership of their land and contribute to a rational

exploitation of these lands through a clear and specific contract on the operating

modes of the land. For example, limiting the use of pesticides, fertilizers and other

harmful techniques greedy and hence irrational non viable use of land...

2. The integration of “land” inputs in operating capital of the investors. This

option has the advantage for indigenous populations to participate in the profits

acquired by the enterprise (business). And at the same time, it has the danger of

participating in losses due to poor management of business or bankruptcy of the

company. The greatest difficulty would be evaluation in figures of this “land” capital

contribution. We must have expertise which is not always available in several

developing countries. The DRC and the province of North Kivu unfortunately do not

escape this sad reality.

3. Modernnizing smallscale agriculture : This formula consists of what an

enterprise would want to exploit, or engage especially in supporting smallscale

farmers so that they can produce better (in quality and quantity) so as to supply raw

materials to the enterprise or company. To do this the enterprise not only provides

technical support – supply of inputs (improved seeds, fertilizers…) but also support in

provides market flow of farmer produce at remunerative prices. This model

developed tens of years ago in certain territories of North Kivu has bore good fruits.

The MIDEMA case for wheat and the CEE Kivu programme for reintroduction of

palm oil are such examples. This system offers the advantage of leaving and

motivating/encouraging the land owners to invest more in their land for more

profitability.

4. Intergrate in the upward and downward production chaine. If there exists a

market for a given agricultural product; there’ll certainly exist a market for the inputs

and outputs of this product. The companies/enterprises do not have to be transformed

into producers. They can be integrated into the production chain upwards or

downwards to the consumer level. It is an issue of being specialized and moving on

to a profitable level in which there’s more value added. The models already exist in

countries in southern Africa, and in other continents and it would be appropriate to

visit them to get inspiration from them.

5. In all cases, we must not fall in a trap where we are opposed to large scale

agricultural production. We should rather analyze the complementarities that exist

between the two production models. This will allow for improvement of negative

perceptions that some have vis-à-vis the others.

75 | P a g e

XIV: GENERAL CONCLUSION.

Bibliography.

landgrab in north-kivu province of d r congo: the real

Documents