41
Our research reveals that the rights acquired through concessions are frequently not clear,
nor is the way in which they are acquired transparent. The process for acquiring concessions
has at times contradicted statutory law. For example, the 1979 Land Law and 1987 Land Law
Regulations prohibit the granting of land occupied by smallholders to commercial (private
sector) interests. However, central, provincial, and district administrators have often
distributed land that is occupied or claimed by smallholders. In several instances, as noted
earlier, government officials justified this process by arguing that smallholders do not have
the capacity to exploit these lands.
The confusion surrounding land concessions—particularly the lack of transparency in the
way these concessions are acquired and held—and the inability of the state to enforce its own
rules or follow its own procedures with regard to concessions in areas currently held by
smallholders are leading to numerous land conflicts. These conflicts are the subject of the
final part of this section.
5. COMPETITIVE AND OVERLAPPING LAND CLAIMS
There are indications that rights to a number of government-granted concessions overlap.
For example, agricultural concessions may partly coincide with each other, or agricultural
concessions may overlay mining concessions. And it is likely that in many—if not
most—instances these state concessions have been granted for land already claimed by local
smallholders under customary tenure regimes. 83 This scenario is, of course, made more
complex by numerous categories of smallholders who also hold competing and complementary
rights to the same lands. 84 Research reveals that in many districts smallholders have been
pushed off their lands, pushed into marginal areas, or had their land rights reduced—in some
cases becoming tenant laborers—when their rights conflicted with those of individuals who
had received state concessions. As the government continues to grant concessions, in several
areas of the country the landless population is growing or changing to include new individuals
who previously held land rights (some of whom maintained rights during the war). S5 In
many cases in different locations in Mozambique, smallholders have resisted attempts to
displace them. Smallholder resistance has taken many forms, including (1) violent
83. Although there are many areas in the country where overlapping concessions have been granted, perhaps
one of the most dramatic is in the Limpopo River Valley. The Ministry of Agriculture and the Gaza Provincial
Office of DINAGECA have granted land concessions in excess of 170,000 hectares in the same stretch along
the river. The MOA has also granted a hunting concession in the area, which co, .,rs approximately 100,000
hectares. The Ministry of Mineral Resources has given concessions totaling more than 4,000 hectares in the
valley (see table 2, p. 31, for additional information). A national park also borders these lands.
84. The case material presented below illustrates an example of competing and complementary smallholder
rights in Gaza Province. This phenomenon was also presented succinctly at the Second National Land
Conference in Mozambique by smallholder farmers from Homoine, Inhambane Province, who argued that their
lands had been distributed by government thrice over to former combatants of the war for independence, to
displaced people during the past civil war, and now to new private interests. This process created four layers
of possible claimants to many of the same parcels in Homoine (Weiss and Myers 1994).
85. This is a particularly serious problem in the more economically important areas, such as near urban
centers, near remaining infrastructure, and near roads, waterways, and markets. Our researchers interviewed
newly (postwar) displaced smallholders in Homoine, Chokwe, Xai-Xai, Angonia, Maputo, Nhamatanda, and
Vanduzi districts. The case of Chokwe is especially revealing, as discussed below.