29
3.5
Losses experienced by farmers
In all of this turmoil, the farmers experienced considerable losses, and clearly these could have
been mitigated if the ZRP had done their duty according to the law and as required by court
orders. Here it should be pointed out that these are losses that are consequential on the unlawful
invasion of the farms, and that this illegal interference was condoned explicitly by the Zimbabwe
Government.
As can be seen from Table 14, the losses were not trivial. Estimates of actual losses of moveable
property, property burned, livestock slaughtered or stolen, and crops destroyed were requested
in the questionnaire. There were also estimates for earnings lost, which were based on the last
year in which the farmers had experienced untrammeled use of their farm, as well as estimates
for medical expenses incurred as a result of the invasions. These latter were for treatment for
injuries suffered, as well as treatment for disorders due to stress and trauma.
Table 14
Gross losses experienced by commercial farmers.
Total US$
[averageUS$]
Costs of medical expenses
974,557[5,666]
Costs of legal fees
1,070,050[5,722]
Loss of moveable property
77,788,419[452,258]
Value of property burned
25,447,983[148,819]
Value of livestock lost
18,394,779[106,946]
Value of lost crops
35,176,154[205,708]
Value of last earnings
209,298,697[1,216,853]
Total losses
368,150,639[1,958,248]
The gross estimate for total losses is about US$368 million for this group of respondents. Clearly
the biggest losses are experienced in loss of earnings, about US$209 million, but the actual
losses are not inconsequential, about US$159 million.
If this is then crudely extrapolated to the commercial farm sector as a whole the figures become
astronomical. Assuming that something in the order of 4,324 commercial farmers have been
evicted
36
from
their
farms, 36
then
the
gross
amount
of
losses
would
approximate
It is difficult to be exact about the figures for the number of farmers that have lost their farms, since evictions are
continuing and different sources report different numbers. Conventionally, it is assumed that there were 4,500 formers
in 2000. The Zimbabwe Government itself stated that 2,652 farms [4, 231, 080 hectares] had been allocated to
127,192 households under the A1 scheme, whilst a further 1,672 farms [2, 198, 814] had been allocated to 7,260
households under the A2 scheme [Report of the Presidential Land Review Committee under the Chairmanship of Dr
A Preliminary Report on Human Rights Violations on Commercial Farms, 2000 to 2005.
Select target paragraph3
Add to table of contents