Background The unprecedented social, political and economic crisis facing Zimbabwe was largely precipitated by the Government of Zimbabwe's(GoZ) seizure of commercial farms in 2000 under the guise of land reform. Land reforms refer to the transfer of land ownership from a relatively small number of wealthy owners to landless peasants. Such transfers may be with or without consent or compensation. Land reform policies are generally implemented as an effort to eradicate food insecurity, promote wider equity and efficiency gains from land redistribution, create political stability and an acceptable property rights regime often with utilitarian motive, that is, the greatest good for the greatest number.6 Though the underlining assumptions are justifiable, they conflict with the prevailing notions of property rights contained in Chapter 3 of the Bill of Rights.7 Property rights define 'who has exclusive rights over property'. In Zimbabwe property rights have been at the centre stage of the contentious land reform programme. Whilst every Zimbabwean agrees that land reform is not only desirable but also a vital necessity to redress the stark imbalances and inequalities of the land holding system, they differ on the way the process has been conducted since the 2000 Fast Track Land Reform Programme. The process has been characterized by gross human rights violations and disregard of the rule of law. These abuses are well documented in the report, Adding Insult to Injury: A preliminary report on human rights violations on commercial farms 2000-2005, by the Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum. The main focus will thus be on property rights violations from 2007 to the present. The land redistribution process has passed through three distinct phases. The first phase was from 1980 to 1990. During this phase, land redistribution was guided by the Lancaster House Constitution, which provided for a sustainable mechanism of dealing with this issue via the “willing buyer willing seller” formula. This approach provided for the protection of property rights of landowners thus effectively putting a seal on compulsory land acquisition for 10 years. In order to enhance a peaceful redistribution of land, the GoZ enacted laws within the limits of this constitution (such as the Communal Land Act Number 21 of 1985, and the Land Acquisition Act Number 21 of 1985) aimed at facilitating a peaceful land redistribution process. The second phase was a shift from the Lancaster House Constitution and it stretched from 1990 to 1997. During this phase, the GOZ adopted a more radical approach on land redistribution. Various amendments were made to the Constitution. In 1990, the Constitution was amended to give the government the right to purchase land at government set prices without the right of appeal thus effectively removing the willing buyer willing seller clause. The Land Acquisition Act Number 3 of 1992 followed this. The Act strengthened powers of the government to acquire land for resettlement including powers to limit the size of farms and also the 8 introduction of land tax (though land tax was never collected). This meant that the compulsory acquisition of land for redistribution and resettlement became possible. As President Mugabe adopted a more radical approach in the land redistribution process, Britain withdrew financial aid on the basis that the acquired land was not being allocated to the intended beneficiaries. President Mugabe was livid and responded by accusing the British government of reneging on its promises. Since then, there has been a bruising verbal war between the two countries. The brewing tension was worsened by the NO vote to the government-sponsored constitutional referendum in 2000. The government interpreted the NO vote as a British sponsored campaign against President Mugabe led by the newly formed opposition political party the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC). The rejected draft constitution had expanded executive powers and also made Britain responsible for funding the land reform failure, through which Zimbabwe would merely take the land. In a fit of revenge, the “war veterans” led a violent land invasion campaign of white-owned farms. Farmers and their farm workers were beaten, tortured and some were killed. These acts of violence are well documented in previous reports. 6 www.wikipedia.org/wiki/land reform. See Chapter 3 of the Constitution of Zimbabwe 8 See the Land Acquisition Act 1992, Government publications. 7 3