CHAPTER ONE

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Study

For nearly a century, up until the 1960s, Africa was colonised by Europe. During this period the colonisers’ laws replaced many traditionally enforced regulations. After independence, the new African states instituted laws that often mixed customary practices and colonial rules . The researcher’s aim is to look at how land conflicts in Africa and Cameroon in particular arose through this problematic mix of tradition and modernity.

Under the French rule in Cameroon, the indigenous people were deprived of their rights under German occupation, only Germans could acquire land . They confiscated most of the South West Region of Cameroon to establish industrial plantations. The traditional rulers resisted, but the penalties for protesting were execution and deportation.

France used land registration to formalize the rights of the French citizens and other whites. The indigenous people retained one right only, to occupy and exploit land in their natural localities. In urban areas, indigenous people were segregated and not allowed to live in the same area as whites. All productive land was attributed to French Citizens and Cameroonians were forced to live in slums.

Southern Cameroon ruled by the British was subdivided into two regions. The North applied regulations used in Northern Nigeria, the South those of Eastern Nigeria. Native right Decrees were enacted in 1927, enabling the Governor General of Nigeria to confer statutory rights on non-natives and foreigners, and customary rights of occupancy to natives . In 1956, all land became the property of customary authorities, except private land called “free hold” and “lease hold” lands. The rights of the indigenous people were now protected under traditional rulers, the representative of the crown. The Commissioner was charged with ensuring the application of the law and protecting all indigenous rights. The public acquisition decree enabled government to acquire land for public purpose.

To boost economic growth, new regulations came into force in 1974 enabling investors to buy land and develop it. For this purpose land was classified into three (3) categories; private land, national land and public land2, guaranteeing free ownership and issuing land to all natural persons and cooperate bodies. Procedures and conditions for obtaining land certificate were put in place.  The regulations also empowered the government to act as guardian to all land, thus allowing intervention to ensure the use of land as national tenure.

This was a major change to the British colonial system. Rather than the government acquiring land from the natives, this regulation confiscated land under the control of native authorities. However, in 1974 land reform regulations appeared ineffective and inefficient.

The assignment of category type to land was carried out rather arbitrarily, while the rights of traditional rulers were omitted, resulting in land related conflicts. Once a land certificate had been issued it was unassailable, inviolable and final. When rights were encroached up on, usually due to fraud, the actual owner would only claim compensation, and to get this he/she had to go to court.

Furthermore, traditional rulers had to acknowledge the land-use rights in order to allow the owners to peacefully enjoy the parcel. The buyer had also to respect the governments land procurement regulations. As result, the buyer pays twice, both the government and traditional rulers.

In addition, obtaining a land certificate is difficult because the costs are in fact high. Bureaucracy slows down the process, and there is corruption and endless conflicts. Civil servants, politicians and businessmen seize large pieces of land on the outskirts of big towns and rural zones just to feed speculation and deprive the poor of their customary land. The government closes its eyes to illegal transactions on national land by traditional rulers.

As a result, the 1974 land reform has not resolved land ownership conflicts, only the rich and politically powerful were able to obtain land certificates. The government thus modified procedures aimed at accelerating the process of obtaining them. Now all land ownership conflicts are settled at regional level, without the intervention of the ministry. The time necessary to obtain a land certificate is limited to a maximum of six (6) months. This is not realistic in practice, processes have not been speeded up and procedures are progressing as slow as before.

1.2 Statement Of The Research Problem

Cameroon has a good legal framework for the resolution of land disputes in the country. However, it has its lapses. To start with adequate measures have not been in place under the Cameroonian legislation.

This is because the legal framework for the resolution of land disputes is available under the 1974 land Tenure Ordinance. The law gives room for freedom for the acquisition of land but in actual fact this is not a remedy stricto senso given that there exist just a few laws regulating land disputes, some of which are ineffective.

1.3 Research Questions

1. What is the major significance between the resolution of disputes during the colonial period and the present day?
2. What are the types causes, and effects of land disputes?
3. What is the alternative dispute resolution channel in the absence of the L.C.B?
4. How effective is the board in resolving problems when it executes its functions?
5. What are the policy recommendations to ameliorate the current situation?

Check Out: Law Project Topics with Materials