LandCam Towards fair and effective legislation on compulsory land acquisition in Cameroon Brendan Schwartz, Senior Researcher IIED, Brendan.Schwartz@iied.org Lorenzo Cotula, Principal Researcher, IIED, Lorenzo.cotula@iied.org Samuel Nguiffo, Secretaire Generale, CED, snguiffo@yahoo.fr Jaff Bamenjo, Coordinator, RELUFA, jnbamenjo@relufa.org Sandrine Kouba, Program Coordinator, RELUFA, skouba@relufa.org Teclaire Same, Project Coordinator, CED, sameteclaire@yahoo.com

LandCam Collaboration Three approaches: International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED) The Centre for Environment and Development (CED) The Network to Fight Hunger in Cameroon (RELUFA) Three approaches: 1) Capacity building for all stakeholders 2) Facilitate multi-stakeholder dialogue at the national level and in three rural areas 3) Conduct research and disseminate findings

Cameroon Context Legal Framework governing land – 1970s and 1980s Untitled rural lands classified as ‘National Lands’ (vast majority of rural land)—communities maintain use rights, no property rights Increase in large land-related investments Compensation ‘scandals’ in the press regularly Ongoing revision of the legal framework governing land

LandCam Towards fair and effective legislation on compulsory land acquisition in Cameroon

Cameroon – Missing public purpose definition States should clearly define the concept of public purpose in law (VGGTs Section 16) India: By Type of Investment (schools, infrastructure, etc.) Germany: ‘if the benefits of the project are disproportionate to the burden imposed upon affected public and private interests’ African Court – Ogiek Case, Kenya: “the Court is of the view that the continued denial of access to and eviction from the Mau Forest of the Ogiek population cannot be necessary or proportionate to achieve the purported justification of preserving the natural ecosystem of the Mau Forest.”

Cameroon – Missing public purpose definition Recommendation: Explicitly define public purpose through a clear statement and possibly a list of illustrative types of projects

Eligible Rights? Ordonnance n° 74-1 of 6 July 1974 creates “National Lands” on all untitled lands: Grants ‘access’ rights Only when improvements are visible are they eligible for compensation, not land itself Colonial idea of ‘vacant lands’ prevents compensation for communally managed territories

Eligible Rights - customary claims should count Recommendations: Strengthen tenure rights for individual and collective lands and resources Allow for invisible land improvements to be compensated for nomadic groups – ‘mise en valeur’ Include rights of people in ‘illegal occupations’

Lost Assets vs Restored Livelihoods Lost Assets are compensated at rates fixed by government in Cameroon, inflation eroding fair market value Intangible cultural properties of land and assets not taken into account Low satisfaction rates with compensation in past projects such as Chad-Cameroon Pipeline

Lost Assets vs Restored Livelihoods Tagliarino (2017) – 37/50 countries use fair market value method exclusively World Bank and VGGTs recommend the use of replacement values Restoration/improvement of livelihoods necessitates compensation ‘package’

Private Sector Point of View Conventional view: Fast and inexpensive expropriation processes facilitate investment Research by Munden Project/TMP Systems: “Displacement is the leading cause of dispute [between companies and communities], acting as a primary driver in 73% of cases” The Financial Risks of Insecure Land Tenure: An Investment View. Munden Project (2012) http://rightsandresources.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/doc_5715.pdf

Conclusion Challenges in compulsory land acquisition remain across the world Use of public purpose should be codified and limited Cameroon’s land tenure reform process provides an opportunity to address challenges