125
belonging to the former communal villages. It is uncertain if they considered the plight or
demands of local smallholders with historical rights. Local customary authorities as well as
locality government officials are reportedly having difficulty resolving many of these disputes;
tension among smallholders persists.
Smallholders with historical rights reported that when they attempted to return to Domue
to reclaim their land, they found other smallholders already there. The former smallholders
claimed that the land had been given to them by either colonial or government officials. The
farmers already present maintained that the land had been abandoned and was free for
occupation. In other areas, farmers who had been given land as part of a colonial or
government scheme returned to find other smallholders, who said they had historical rights,
farming on what they thought was their land. Apparently there was great confusion over who
had superior rights to the land' Locality and district government officials were aware of
some of these conflicts but were unsure of what to do. They indicated that there was no
policy and that they were waiting for a course of action to be established.29I8n the meantime,
they were attempting to help smallholders find land to farm temporarily.
As in M'Languene, private commercial farmers started acquiring some CAIA land in
1986. District authorities were unable to tell us how many commercial agricultural
concessions had been granted to these nonlocal farmers. Returning smallholders have tried
to recover these lands and have petitioned the district government authorities requesting the
removal of the commercial farmers.' Commercial farmers answered that they had acquired
the land legally and that the government was not protecting their rights. One commercial
farmer declared that he had invested several million meticais and demanded that the
government uphold his right to the land. Another commercial farmer accused the government
of withdrawing land-use rights in an election year. 30' District government authorities contend
that they are reviewing the case and that no titles will be issued until all the facts have been
acquired. In the interim, tension between smallholders and commercial farmers remains.
5. CONCERNS RAISED BY THE CASE OF ANGONIA
The case study in Tete Province reveals that a large percentage of the refugee population
has returned to the province, specifically to Angonia District, without hinderance. Although
we do not know what is happening in the RENAMO-controlled areas, we are certain that
most of the refugees in the government-controlled portions have gained access to some land
and have planted crops during the last two agricultural seasons. It is not evident, however,
whether smallholders have secure tenure rights. It is also not clear where smallholders are
297. Interviews with smallholder farmers, Domue, February 1994; interviews with agricultural extension
agents, Domue, February 1994.
Unfortunately, we have no data on the number of conflicts occurring in either Domue or M'Languene;
however, the frequency of reports about conflict from smallholders was substantial.
298. Interview with locality representative, Domue, February 1994.
299. Interview with locality agricultural extension agent, Domue, February 1994.
300. Smallholders commented that both FRELIMO and RENAMO have been trying to "mobilize" peasants
in the district.