Sale of Zimbabwe property going ahead

2012-09-20 20:32

Bloemfontein - The sale of a Zimbabwean government-owned property in Cape Town to settle a punitive legal cost order will go ahead, civil rights group AfriForum said on Thursday.

"We will ask the sheriff in Cape Town this week to continue with arrangements for the judicial selling of the property in Salisbury Way in Kenilworth," said AfriForum spokesperson Willie Spies.

This follows a dismissed appeal by the Zimbabwean government in the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA).

The SCA heard an appeal by the Zimbabwean government against a high court ruling, which registered and enforced a Southern African Development Community (SADC) tribunal ruling locally and resulted in the attachment of Zimbabwean property in Cape Town.

"It would probably be the first time in legal history that there would be a judicial selling of a state’s property owing to gross human rights [violations]," said Spies.

The litigation began when Zimbabwean farmer Mike Campbell approached the SADC tribunal in Windhoek for relief in 2008.

Illegal, racist

This was after he and his family were targeted by the land grabs of Zimbabwe's president Robert Mugabe.

The tribunal, comprising five judges from various Southern African states, ruled in November 2008 that the Zimbabwean land reform process was illegal and racist.

It held that Campbell and 77 other farmers in the matter should be left in peace and their property rights restored.

Continued legislation led to the registration of the tribunal's finding in the North Gauteng High Court in Pretoria in February 2010, and the attachment of a Zimbabwean government-owned property in Kenilworth, Cape Town.

The attachment was to satisfy a punitive cost order granted by the SADC tribunal.

On Thursday, a unanimous SCA judgment by a full bench of five judges held that Zimbabwe's contention that it was not bound by the amendments of the SADC treaty had no merit.

AfriForum helped the group of Zimbabwean farmers to register the regional tribunal’s finding in South Africa, which would now result in the selling of the Kenilworth property.

  • fred.fraser.12 - 2012-09-20 21:05

    "The tribunal, comprising five judges from various Southern African states, ruled in November 2008 that the Zimbabwean land reform process was illegal and racist." As clear as day. A good judgement. Yet the senile racist Robert Mugabe continues unabated.

      rupesh.hari.7 - 2012-09-20 21:28

      I agree with the five judges. If they had instead come back and said they had no authority to rule on the case, most of the readers will be calling them racist.

  • stefan.debeer.5 - 2012-09-20 21:27


  • charnelle.bester - 2012-09-20 21:27

    Hope it is also going to be seen as illegal here...When they start.

  • crracker.crackerr - 2012-09-20 21:36

    At least nobody must later after nationalization pretend that they didn't realize the risks of nationalization for this country. No exports of significance will be safe outside our border and air space from seizure by claimants who have lost their investments and assets as a result of nationalization. Apparently Julius Malema has a grudge against the Chinese too. He is looking for some REAL trouble. Of course we will also have to consider little things like our fuel requirements and cell phones and batteries for them. All imported of course. Wonder how those little requirements will play out? We in this country are on our own. The world will take from us what they like and we will be powerless. Rather get the poor and EVERYBODY ELSE to start investing in the economy. Organise the capital accumulation. Don't for ever stay a manual worker for the rest of your life. That is exactly what the trade unions wish for you. You pay their membership fees and do it ironically with income derived from the capitalist system. The trade unions have medical, other insurance policies and of course retirement funding worked out beautifully. They are already participating in wealth/capital accumulation through their various insurance, pension and medical aid schemes. And of course they will use only private medical facilities. And of course Cosatu trade unions protect the low standard of work by its members in the public hospitals and clinics. Can't workers see it for themselves?

  • pages:
  • 1