HIS MAJESTY THE KING JETS OFF TO TAIWAN MBONDZELA FARM DWELLERS TO LOSE E35M PROPERTY

MBABANE – Investing in a private-owned farm or property can come at a high cost for a squatter.

This is the tale of the 29 homesteads that are at the Mahamba Gorge farm situated at Mbondzela, Nhlangano.
These homesteads have a combined value of E35 823 864.75 according to a valuation that was carried out by Swaziland Realty Consultants (Pty) Ltd. The valuation report depicts that the date of inspection was on June 14, 2023 and the date of valuation was on June 16, 2023.

Swaziland Realty Consultants are registered property valuers that provide a full range of real estate valuation and property consulting services. They offer services in residential, commercial, industrial and agricultural valuation and property advisory. The items that informed the valuation included construction and accommodation, fields, other auxiliary structures like poultry houses, pit latrines, piggery and goats kraal as well as fruit trees, among others.

Valuable

The most valuable property, as depicted in the report, is one owned by Nkosibona Nhleko at E3 715 062 and the homestead with the lowest value is owned by Muzi Mdluli at E87 600. The purpose of conducting the valuation, as narrated by Petros Mdluli, was to have a conclusive report on the value of each homestead so that they would present a proposal to the farm owner to have each homestead compensated according to the value of its property and that would be the sole condition of vacating the farm.

Petros owns one of the homesteads which were demolished last week Sunday by a TLB owned by the farm owner, and it was alleged that the people who carried out the exercise were acting at the instruction of the farm owner.
Petros’s property, which comprises of the main house, five outbuildings, a poultry house, piggery, maize crib and tank shed, among other things, is valued at E2 752 368.

Compensate

Petros, who is among the leaders of the squatters, revealed that the intention was to present the valuation report to the farm owner and give him the condition to compensate each homestead according to the value of each homestead.
This is contrary to an offer that was made by the farm owner, where he shared to the residents that he would offer them building material to construct two-room houses and a rondavel for each homestead.

The farm owner’s representative, Nkosingivile Dlamini from Dynasty Inc. Attorneys, revealed that his client had not received the presentation from the residents of the farm. He shared that in any event, it would have not made sense to them to compensate the residents a sum of E35.8 million because that figure was higher than the cost of purchasing the farm.

Development

He said the farm, even to the present day, was not worth E35.8 million because it did not have much development and it was dominantly vacant. He mentioned that for every asset that was there, the most valuable was the land. He wondered what informed the E35.8 million, because the valuation should exclude the land at which the properties are at, and to him, it was the most valuable asset. He said that his client was cooperative in that he offered to provide building material to the residents and help them construct two-room houses and a rondavel in each homestead.

“It would not have made sense to compensate the residents with a figure that is higher than the cost of the farm. The residents were given an offer which even government would have matched if it was to compensate them. “The farm owner has always been willing to assist them and he said that within six months, he would have completed constructing their properties but they have always rejected,” he said.

Dlamini mentioned that they actually had four meetings to present their proposal and government officers who are responsible for the calculations of compensations in such instances were present in the meetings to ensure that their proposal was within the required and expected standards.

Frustrated

In a ruling that was prepared by the late Minister of Natural Resources and Energy, Peter Bhembe, on July 9, 2020, the respondent (Mahamba Gorge Farm owner) submitted that he had plans to develop the property into a game reserve and a tourist attraction; however, such plans were frustrated by the residents on the farm.

The respondent was asked if he had problems with the residents on the farm and the response was that in actual fact, he had no problems having them reside on the farm, except that he was concerned that they were not cooperative regarding the nature of the business he intended to do on the property.

The matter was an appeal in terms of Section 9 (3) of the Farm Dwellers Control Act, 1982, against a decision of the Central Farm Dwellers Tribunal (Central Tribunal) of the October 19, 2017, wherein the said tribunal upheld a decision of the Shiselweni District Farm Dwellers Tribunal (District Tribunal) of the October 14, 2016, directing, among other things, that the residents vacate the farm by June 30, 2017.

The essence of the ruling of the Central Tribunal was that the residents and the respondent could not co-exist based on the allegations of acts of violence of the people who reside on the farm against the owner of the farm.

Post your comment

Your name:

Your e-mail address:

Add your comments:

Please enter the code you see in the image:

Image:

Code: