landgrab in north-kivu province of d r congo: the real
TRANSCRIPT
1 | P a g e
Landgrab in North-Kivu Province of D R Congo:
The real situation and its consequences on small-scale farmer.
DRAFT REPORT
Simplex Kambale Malembe
Goma, Democratic Republic of Congo
May 2011.
2 | P a g e
REPORT OF THE STUDY ON LANDGRABBING AND ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR
SMALL-SCALE FARMERS IN THE NORTH-KIVU PROVINCE.
WORK PLAN AND TABLE OF CONTENTS:
0. Word from the consultant.
I. General Introduction.
II. Presentation of the North Kivu province.
1. Administrative presentation.
2. Presentation of the land administration plan.
III. As concerns the occupation of rural land in North Kivu.
1. List of plantations in North Kivu.
2. List of farms in Nord Kivu.
3. Some comments.
IV. Farms and plantations having belonged to CNKI blocks.
V. Problem of parcs and reserves in North Kivu province.
VI. Big land negotiations in the last ten years.
VII. Summary of motivations of actors behind the land grabbing.
VIII. Land law in DRC and its implications on farm land in North Kivu province.
1. The position of the two land management systemse.
2. The law on fundamental principles of agriculturep.
3. Law relating to relationship between customary chiefs and agricultural producers
in North Kivuu.
4. Characterisitics of land system in force.
5. Developping practices and customs.
6. Patial Conclusion.
IX. Initiatives at the regional, national and international level.
X. Some cases of farmer struggle which could serve as examples.
XI. Some reccomendations and strategiy elements to various leaders of EAFF.
XII.Some business models for the farmer organizations and other actors.
List of abbreviations.
3 | P a g e
0. WORD FROM THE CONSULTANT:
The report comes after several months of contract signing, which was practically achieved in
October 2010.
This delay is due mainly to several facts; the time taken for the tryearsfer of the funds for
work came a little later, basically at the beginning of 2011, when the consultant had already
taken other engagements with other partners in the first quarter of the year.
Then, continuing insecurity in some parts of the province resulted in, the repeated
postponement of the task of collecting reliable data.
At the stage of producing this report, we sincerely thank the leaders of EAFF for the trust and
confidence they have had in us and above all the patience they have shown in the production
of this report.
The province of North Kivu is not only large (larger than RWANDA and BURUNDI put
together). This also reflects not only the difficropies in covering this large area but also and
above all the different realities in the region.
We also thank all our investigators/researchers deployed on ground, where, for reasons of
strategy, the consultant could not make to due to security factors.
Their courage and determination were great lessons of patriotism and selflessness for us.
Our special thanks go to Mr. PALUKU MIVIMBA, the president of the FOPAC and member
of the Board of Directors of EAFF, who has given us moral support, sometimes in difficrop
times that almost discouraged us.
It would be ungrateful to ignore the work and the availability of tribal chiefs, heads of
different departments (land titles, land registry, mining services…). We remain grateful for
the qualities of information given to us despite the difficrop context in which many of them
work in.
They are real fighters.
The farmer declarations and availability are evidence that the phenomenon of land grabbing is
a reality in North Kivu province despite attempts of falsification/trickery by other actors.
We truly appreciated, any information they have given us throughout our investigations.
Finally, for the logistics service that the "FAT / Great Lakes" Forum des Amis de la Terre -
Forum of Friends of Land, we can only thank all the leaders of this organization, the CEO
who has edited this report.
This work is a first in its essence and its ambitions on the issue in North Kivu province. As
such it must have imperfections that would take of some value to many readers. We are aware
of this. Indeed, census work, for identification and production of a strategy proposal for
reclaiming land rights is not an easy task. We must also bring into fore the contextual,
security and administrative difficropy which was an obstacle in accessing all the data that
would have enabled us to respond to the expectations of all.
It was a must for us to dare. This is what is important. It is here then that we must also thank
the leaders of EAFF for having dared and sustained the initiative. The land issue is one of the
most sensitive issues in the province of North Kivu. We lived this reality during our
investigations with statements et and sometimes reservations and resistances we met from our
respondents.
This investigation opens a new field of research action for practitioners and scientists from all
sides. It therefore suffers the fate of pioneer. The innocent martyr. Martyr due to its
imperfection, but also a martyr by what it dared, daring to tackle a theme which many
4 | P a g e
actors/players would have rather left it silent in the context of the province of North Kivu. We
also recognize this.
This draft will go through the process of developing into a final report as agreed in the
contract of service and as such, it is likely to undergo amendments according to the
observations of one or the other starting with the sponsors, that is, EAFF, the main actors
involved, that is the small-scale producers and other actors contacted like traditional leaders,
heads of services/departments and large-scale farmers contacted. .
SIMPLEX KAMBALE MALEMBE
CONSULTANT.
I. GENERAL INTRODUCTION.
It is in executing the service contract signed between the consultant on the one hand and the
Farmers' Federation EAFF, that a study on land grabbing and its implications for small-scale
farmers in the province of North Kivu was conducted. This study, done in several phases
eventually spread over 5 of the 6 territories of North Kivu province; for security reasons, we
could not access the territory of WALIKALE.
The major concern of EAFF, in sponsoring this study can be summarized as follows:
� To have as much as possible detailed information that will enable it to position itself
well as regards the phenomenon of massive land acquisition in North-Kivu province.
� To highlight/identify elements for advocacy at the national, regional and international
level that favour the small-scale producer in North-Kivu province in order to
safeguard his rights against land grabbing.
So, it was for the consultant and his team to collect information around the following points:
� Identify literature on land grab in the region.
� Analyze the legal framework (land law) and lthe local practices on land management
in relation to their implication on the small-scale producer.
� Analyze the motivations of the authors of land grabbing and identify cases that have
already taken place and those that are ongoing.
5 | P a g e
� Highlight the implications of this phenomenon of land grabbing on the small-scale
producer.
� Identify attempts and forms of « resistance » or actions undertaken by the small-scale
producers to defend and protect their rights as concerns this phenomenon.
� To give recommendations and strategies to be implemented by EAFF in order to
protect the rights of small producers in the province.
The study took place for a period of three months and had the following main steps:
� The collection and exploitation of necessary documentation.
� Training of investigators/researchers on the field work.
� Field work: this was done twice. The first time, in the month of December 2010 and
the second time in march 2011. The field work was coordinated by the consultant
who supervised the investigators (Beni, Lubero and Rutshuru territories).
� Data compilation and comparison with the different documents available to us.
� Preparation of the first draft of the report.
The report comprises three main parts except the introduction and conclusion.
These are:
1. Presentation of the North-Kivu province.
2. Issues related to the land grabbing.
3. The sutuation of the land grabbing phenomenon.
4. Some explanation of the phenomenon.
5. Recommendations and possible farmer strategies for the protection and defense of the
smale-scale producers’ interests.
6. The difficropies/challenges encountered and strategies to overcome them.
II. PRESENTATION OF THE NORTH KIVU PROVINCE.
A. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATION.
1.1. Area: 59631 Km2.
1.2. Administrative subdivision: 6 territories, 3 towns, 10 urban communes, 17
chiefdoms, 97 groupings, 52 quartiers and 5 cities.
- Towns: Goma, Butembo and Beni.
- Territories: Beni, Lubero, Rutshuru, Masisi, Walikale and Nyiragongo.
1.3. Population estimate: 7.600.000 people as of 2010.
1.4. Density: about 130 inhabitants per Km2.
1.5. Density of arable land: more than 300 inhabitants per Km2.
1.6.Limits :
- North: Western Province.
- South: South Kivu Province.
- West: Rwanda and Uganda.
- West: Maniema Province.
The following tables give details on administrative sub-divisions: sources: North Kivu
Monographe.
6 | P a g e
Table n° 1. Goma town: Headquaters of the province.
Communes. Area. (Km2) Population density. Locality.
GOMA 33,45 2.860,6 1. Katindo
2. Keshero
3. Volcan
4. Mikeno
5. Lac Vert
6. Mont Goma.
KARISIMBI 42,27 2.203 1. Kahembe
2. Katoyi
3. Majengo
4. Mabanga
5. Murara
6. Ndosho
7. Mugunga
Table n° 2 : Butembo town :
Communes. Area. (Km2) Density Locality
BULENGERA 55,18 1. Mutiri
2. Kimbulu
3. Mukuna
4. Kamesi Mgoodzo
5. Rughenda
6. Kyaghala
7. Wayene
8. Kalemire
KIMEMI 42,25 1. Commercial
2. Biondi
3. Lumumba
4. Bwinyole
5. Vutetse.
6. Ngengere.
7. Vutsundo
8. Malende
MUSUSA 40,3 1. Vungi
2. Kitulu
3. Matanda
4. Katwa.
5. Bwiningo.
6. Ngingi.
7. Vghole.
VULAMBA 52,61 1. Kambali
2. Matembe
3. Mukalangira
4. Congo ya Sika.
7 | P a g e
Table n° 3: Beni town.
COMMUNES AREA (Km2) Population Density Locality
BUNGULU 13,5 N.R
RWENZORI 14 N.R
BEU 15 N.R
MULEKERA 13 N.R
TOTAL 55 82
- The total population of Beni is estimated to be 450000 people.
Table n° 4. Territories, towns and communities.
TERRITORIES Area in Km2 TOWNS AND
COLLECTIVITES
Area in Km2
BENI 7484 1. Oicha town
2. Col. Bashu
3. Col. Beni-Mbau
4. Col. Rwenzori
5. Col. Watalinga
1. 93
2. 1.754
3. 2.589
4. 2.496.
5. 610.
LUBERO 18.096 1. Cité de Kirumba.
2. Cité de Kayna
3. Cité de Kanyabayonga
4. Col. de Baswagha
5. Col. de Bapere
6. Col. de Bamate.
7. Col. de Batangi.
1. 5
2. 8
3. 9
4. 3.640
5. 8.872
6. 1.776
7. 3.786
RUTSHURU 5.289 1. Cité de Kiwandja.
2. Col. de Bwisha
3. Col. de Bwito
1. 30
2. 2.709.
3. 2.550
MASISI 4.744 1. Col. de Bahunde
2. Col. de Bashali
3. Col. de Osso.
4. Col. de Katoyi.
1. 1.455
2. 1.510
3. 1.449
4. 330
WALIKALE 23.475 1. Col. de Bakano
2. Col. de Wanianga
1. 4.238
2. 19.237
NYIRAGONGO 333 1. Col. de Bakumu 1. 333
SOURCE: Preparatory work for the national consultation workshop on rural and agricropural
development in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Terms of Reference for North Kivu
province.
NYIRAGONGO is the smallest territory with an area of 333 Km2 which is 0,27% of the total
area of the province. WALIKALE is the largest territory with an area of 23.475 Km2 being
39,46 % of the total area of the province.
Even if we did not access recent data, the available documentation shows that the smallest
density in the province is in Bapere in Lubero territory followed by Wanianga in Walikale
territory.
Table n° 5 : distribution of land per territory.
N° Territory Total Area of % No of Mean area
8 | P a g e
area rural
land in
Km2
localities/villages per
locality/Km2
1. BENI 7484 4362 58 145 50,7
2. LUBERO 18096 18047 99 174 104
3. RUTSHURU 5289 5259 99,4 111 48
4. MASISI 4744 4704 99 96 49
5. WALIKALE 23475 23475 100 90 260
6. NYIRAGONGO 163 163 100 54 9
Source: Provincial division plan of North-Kivu.
The following comes out clearly from this table:
The North-Kivu province is predominantly rural. It is only Beni territory that has a large
proportion of urban land. This is due mainly to the fact that many farms are owned by former
colonialists. This is therefore the case since colonial times. See the table below.
Moreover, the locality with the small average size per locality is found in NYIRAGONGO
whereas WALIKALE has more than 250KM2
per locality.
B. PRESENTATION OF THE LAND ADMINISTRATION PLAN.
North-Kivu province is devided into the following 7 land constituencies.
1. Goma: covers Goma town the headquarters of the province.
2. Butembo: covers the town of Butembo and the chiefdoms/collectivities of Baswagha,
Bapere in Lubero and Bashu in Beni.
3. Kayna: covers Bamate Batangi collectivities.
4. Rutshuru: Covers Rutshuru territory.
5. Masisi: covers Masisi territory.
6. Oicha: covers Beni Mbau, Watalinga, and Rwenzori.
7. Beni: covers Beni town.
The province’s coverage in land services is still inadequate in that the cities/towns of Goma,
Butembo and Beni are the only ones close to the services.
Table n° 5 : Area land coverage:
N° DISTRICT ENTITY COVERED AREA
Km2
TOTAL
POPULATION.
1. Goma Goma town 75,72
TOTAL AREA 75,72
2. Butembo Butembo town 190,7
Bapere community 8.872
Baswagha community 3.640 493.347
Bashu community 1.754
TOTAL AREA 14.456
3. KAYNA Bamate community 1.776 324.088
Batangi community 3.786
Kirumba town 5
Kayna town 8
Kanyabayonga town 9
TOTAL AREA 5.584
9 | P a g e
4. Rutshuru Territoire de Rutshuru 5.259
Kiwandja town 30
TOTAL AREA 5.289
5. Masisi Masisi territory 4.744 366.680+
BASHALI
TOTAL AREA 4.744
6. Oicha Oicha town 93
Beni-Mbau community 2.589
Rwenzori community 2.496
Watalinga community 610
TOTAL AREA 5788
7. Beni Beni town 58
TOTAL AREA 58
This table clearly shows that land services cover very large areas and therefore,
their geographical accessibility remains a problem especially for rural populations. In fact,
there are great distances for these people to get to the offices of the various land divisions.
The smaller districts are: Beni: 58 Km2, Goma: 75.72Km
2 respectively.
The whole territory of Masisi has only one land division and Rutshuru has two.
Moreover, the largest constituency/district is Butembo with 14,456km2, more than half of
Burundi.
In addition, the province of North Kivu, is itself larger than Rwanda and Burundi put
together totaling 51,000Km2 against 59,631km
2 of North Kivu.
III. OCCUPATION OF RURAL LAND IN NORTH KIVU PROVINCE.
For this chapter, we present results from the study carried out on the ground on the land use
by farmers and large planters.
These data were enriched by information collected in different documents available at the
agricropural services offices at the provincial and terrirorial level.
10 | P a g e
III.1. LIST OF PLANTATIONS IN NORTH-KIVU
1. TERRITOIRE DE LUBERO
N°
NAME OF
LANTATION LOCATION FORMER OWNER
NAME OF
ACQUIRER OCCUPATION TITLE
TOTAL
Hect. AREA in value SPECULATION OBSERVATION
1 VUGOGHO Kanyabayonga Bouher Arnold Mwigha Masinda Cert. Of ownership 50 40 coffee
10ha taken by the
town
2 MIKUTA Bulotwa Danly Hirlem Pandele Sh Cert. Of ownership 64 50 quinquina
9ha of quinquina
and food crop
3 BULOTWA Bulotwa Clignet Kyamakya Marc Allotment letter 200 coffee
Inhabited + food
crop
4 BULENGERA Bulengera Joye Alberic Muhindo K Request for land 100 14 coffee
concession en conf
5 NDEREMBI Nderembi Joye Daniel Kambale M Request for land 100 8 coffee Food crops
6 ITALA Itala Du Bois Kambale M Request for land 100 3 cassava
Insufficient land for
exploitation
7 KINYONDO Kinyondo Albale Trier Kahindo Map Certificate 73 13 coffee + quinquina
8 BWALEYRE Kayna Prud'homme Muratusi K Contract 100 4 coffee population
9 KAYNA Kayna Vanos Mungumwa Kas Contract 73 15 coffee taken by the town
10 KAHURU II Kayna Froidmond Katsuva Tay Request for land 100 coffee Not maintained
11 KAHURU I Kayna Sierge du Bois Kambere Mule Allotment letter 50 30 coffee not maintained
12 KASANDO Kasando Gouvea Kambere Mule Certificate 284 34 coffee + quinquina plus food crop
13 KISUYI Kayna Dupont Louis Katsongo M Certificate 50 31 coffee not maintained
14 IVATAMA Kayna Arban André Kioma Wandi Certificate 100 60 coffee not maintained
15 MKAMUMBA Kayna Michel Paluku Luhotwa Certificate 100 12 coffee not maintained
16 MULIRAMO Kayna Nick Albert SOLPOKI 54 20 coffee not maintained
17 KAKOVERO
Bloc
Lwangongo Marchal Van L Kasereka Luv Contract 101 50 coffee not maintained
18 TUVALI Musienene De Buldeling Kakule Kal Contract 202 tea In conflict
11 | P a g e
19 KYAVIKERE Mageria Van Over Berg Kasereka Luv Allotment letter 50 50 coffee + quinquina Tea factory
20 VUKEKEMA Luotu Van Doorken Katsuva Kirivutsi 3 3 coffee coffee+food crop
21 KAVALE Musienene Van Over Berg Magateso tea + afforestation
22 KAVETYA Muhangi Van Stan Kiste Mathe + Katimba Allotment letter 68 40 coffee
23 TOMU Biambwe Garles Robert Kasereka sivi Allotment letter 100 coffee robusta
24 MULENDU Mabambi Hambert Lucien Mahamba vyakera Request for land 100 5 coffee
25 NDEKO Mabambi Gyemberg Paluku Kaghe contract 90 40 coffee
26 NGONGI Mabambi Gyemberg Mumbere Muh Request for land 30 30 Food crop
27 KAVALI/LUBERO Lubero Brossens Kambale Viso certificate 100 30 Food crop
28 KIVIKA Kimbulu Martens Mukeleghe contract 25 25 quinquina
29 MULUNDI I Mabambi Van Gasse Paluku Lolwako certificate 115 11 coffee+ Food crop
30 MULUNDI II Mabambi Gysemberg Katembo Vuma contract 32 32 coffee
31 KITOVO Muhangi Dejager Makembe Kindoho contract 50 46 coffee
32 KHIMA Katolo Hannape Maunga Kimbute contract 29 20 afforestation
33 KAVALI/LUBERO Musienene Baby Alfred Magateso contract 28 10 quinquina
34 KAVANDA I ET II Kyambogho Gregorien Kambere Kyas contract 37 37 Afforestation Food crop +reafforestation
35 NGOLOBWE Kyambogho Davidopoules K Bindo contract 28 28 afforestation
36 KALEGHA Mabambi Van Cupsen COOFICO Butembo 120 5 quinquina
37 MALENDE Malende Van Daele Rubindo lusi 21 20 quinquina+afforestation
38 MALENDE Malende Liane Victor Kahindo Ndekesisri 10 10 afforestation
2937 789
2. NYIRAGONGO TERRITORY
1 NYAKABANDA Nyakabanda Liesson Gatariki Ntwali Acte de cession 20 20 afforestation+ Food crop not maintained
2 JOLI BOIS Byahi Clevaux Banzira n°52/7 34 34 afforestation+ Food crop not maintained
3 BAHA II Byahi Geens Buzigiye contract 23 23 afforestation+ Food crop not maintained
77 77
3. WALIKALE TERRITORY
1 HOMBO Hombo Van de Walleg Mme Mahamba Allotment N°600 300 300 Oil palm maintained
2 KILAMBO Kilambo Rochus Léon Soda Shani Allotment N°2278 85 80 coffee robusta maintained
3 MUTOYO Mutoyo Van Dorpe Okenge Allotment N°2276 60 60 coffee robusta maintained
4 KITATENDE Kitatenge Van Weteer Kibira Katarungu Allotment N°2276 300 300 coffee robusta maintained
12 | P a g e
5 NDIPO I Ndipo Stielties W Lihau 50 50 coffee robusta maintained
6 NDIPO II Ndipo Stielties Roberto Lihau 50 50 coffee robusta maintained
7 MILUNGU Milungu Schietekala 11 11 coffee robusta maintained
8 TCHAMAKA Tchamaka Lemaire jules Ets OSAKOWALO 198 45 coffee robusta maintained
9 OSOKARI Osokari Thelmissen A Ets KIMA 95 35 coffee robusta maintained
10 LUGO (WASSA) Logu (Wassa) Latinis 7 7 coffee robusta
Maintained
11 Kanga Van Ecknaut Shemakuru 50 50 coffee robusta maintained
12 NGORA Ngora Fauconnier Kibira Katarungu Allotment N°227725 25 25 coffee robusta maintained
13 IHULA Ihula Renard 605 6,5 tea Not maintained
14 KAMISUKU Kamisuku Brainbant j, 20 Oil palm + coffee maintained
15 RUHENZI Ruhenzi Bex Butu Biandimeno 30 30 coffee robusta maintained
16 ILUNGA Ilunga Rochus Léon Lwamiango 15 10 Oil palm maintained
17 NDIPPO III Ndipo Stieljes A. 50 50 coffee robusta maintained
18 DJEMBE Kitatenge Matelaer J. Ets KIMA 275 coffee robusta maintained
19 KITIMBATIMBA Kitimbatimba Latinis Ets KIMA 50 15 coffee robusta maintained
20 OSOKARI Osokari Brainbant j, Ets OSAKO WALO 20 20 coffee robusta maintained
2296
4. MASISI TERRITORY
1 THEKI NYABIONDO Nyabiondo Duprez Mwananteba 1000 550 tea, reafforestation, crop
2 KISHENGO THEKI KITU Kitu Mahanga Herman Population 78 178 tea, crop
3 MAHANGA Mahanga Duprez Mwananteba 582 375 tea, crop
4 LOASHI Loashi Cauwe Ngezayo K 319 284 tea, crop, reafforestation
5 BUHENDA Buhenda Cauwe Kanunga Ruti 600 350 tea, crop, reafforestation
6 KIMOO Kimoo Herman Baeni 300 280 crop
7 NDANDU Ndandu Antoine Kitsa Kitambala 89 89 crop, reafforestation
8 NYANGE Nyange Cauwe Muhima 190 180 tea, crop, reafforestation
9 NGURU Nguru Deprez Nzamukwereka 86 86 tea, crop
10 NYABURA Nyabura Laurent Kasuku wa Ngeo 600 tea, crop
11 SALM-BIN-SALM Nyabura Verlaet Salm-bin-Salm 50 50 crop
12 KALEMBE Kalembe Naleonry Fataki 50 58 crop
13 KALEMBE Kalembe Muhima K Fataki 50 50 crop
14 MULIHO Muliho Tassin Hern Kasuku wa Ngeo 120 120 tea, crop
15 MIHARA Mihara Van Den Dael Mutoo Murayiri 100 75 tea, crop
13 | P a g e
16 NGURU Nguru Cuyt Camil Nzamukwereka 50 50 tea, crop
17 MUHANGA LUK Muhanga Veri Houts Rwakineza 52 52 tea, crop
18 KIPFUMWE Kipfumwe Grelle Léen Rwakineza 127 127 tea, crop
19 KIHIMBA Kihimba Van Der Weekf Mbiyirwa 143 127 tea, crop
20 KIHIMBA Kihimba Dewittiyou Bisukiro 14 tea, crop
21 KAHIRA Kahira Fievettean Bisukiro 38 tea, crop
22 NGURU Nguru Gerris Ferdinand Salumu 50 tea, crop
23 KAHIRA Kahira Sydenjean Habimana 82 tea, crop
24 KASHASHA Kashasha Bucherotto Habimana 39 tea, crop
25 LUKULU Lukulu Bormyears Farm Espérance 92 tea, crop
26 NGURU Nguru Guytcamil Nzamukwereka 50 tea, crop
27 NGURU Nguru Guytcamil Habimana 50 tea, crop
28 MIHARA Minanga Delabie Nzamukwereka 70 tea, crop
29 MWESO Mweso Van Slemboruoc Hangi tea, crop
30 RUSINCHA Rusincha Van Nayeurachi Bashali Mokoto tea, crop
31 SHASHA Shasha Brakan Munyandutiye 119 100 coffee trees, crop
32 KITUMBILI Kitumbili Deroche Salumu 85 coffee trees, crop
33 NGUMBA Ngumba Plumier Salumu 168 coffee trees, crop
34 BWAMBALIRO Bwambaliro Brotheren Ruyange 160 coffee trees, crop
35 KISHAKA Kishaka Chrystchoscours Madimba 70 coffee trees, crop
36 LUSHANGI Lushangi Chrystchoscours Kibira Katarungu 300 coffee trees, crop
37 KIULI Kiuli Marchal Madimba 400 coffee trees, crop
38 LUHONGA Luhonga Jetta Mukendi 300 coffee trees, crop
39 BWINCHA Bwincha Dulet Willam 31 coffee trees, crop
40 MUGANDO Mugando Marchal Nyota 30 coffee trees, crop
41 KIMOKA Kimoka Bresky Hangi Masikini 30 coffee trees, crop
42 CADUKI/UDKE Caduki Chrystchoscours Kibira Katarungu 200 coffee trees, crop
43 KECO-LUINDI Luindi Ritiwegor Kimbwa 410 quinquina
44 KOBE Kobe Chrystchoscours Kibira Katarungu 50 coffee trees, crop
45 MINDI Mindi Descoth Tussi 190 crop, reafforestation
46 NGWIRO Ngwiro Descoth Population 100 crop, fishfarming
47 MUKOHWA Mukohwa Rombeau Bakungu Phuna 30 crop
48 NGUMBA Ngumba Vend Ven Mirimo 14 crop
14 | P a g e
49 KIPFUMU Kipfumu CNKI block Bakungu Mayao 112 crop
50 KIPFUMU Kipfumu CNKI block Bakungu Kalwy 112 crop
51 NYANGE Nyange CNKI block Muhima 120 crop
52 MUKOHWA Mukohwa Rombeau Bakungo Phuna 15 crop
53 NGEREKO Ngereko CNKI block Baramisi Crop
54 KIPFUMU Kipfumu CNKI block Population 120 crop
8237
5. BENI TERRITORY
1 MANGODOMU MANGODOMU Baddy Alfred Lutu Luwanya 93 93 Food crops in cleanup
2 KYATSABA KYATSABA Drapier Kasereka Matemuli 179 179 Food crops in cleanup
3 NZUKI NZUKI Imerie et Lale CAPACO 68 68 food crops in cleanup
4 MBOSO MBOSO Cibrario CAPACO 40 40 food crops in cleanup
5 BINGO BINGO Jacques Kahindo Ndekesiri 500 500 food crops in cleanup
6 BINGO BINGO Paluku Sivirwa Ngba Mwana 80 80 food crops in cleanup
7 BINGO BINGO Desiron Mambo 125 125 food crops in cleanup
8 MANGANGO MANGANGO Maio de Souze Noguetra et cie 600 600 food crops in cleanup
9 MANGANGO MANGANGO Odysse Os André PLANOKI 186 186 food crops in cleanup
10 MANGANGO MANGANGO Odysse Os André PLANOKI 95 95 food crops in cleanup
11 LUWOLA LUWOLA Odysse Os André PLANOKI 100 100 food crops in cleanup
12 NGITE NGITE Odysse Os André PLANOKI 100 100 food crops in cleanup
13 NAMIKI NAMIKI Odysse Os André PLANOKI 100 100 food crops in cleanup
14 MATABI MATABI Odysse Os André PLANOKI 100 100 food crops in cleanup
15 MANGANGO MANGANGO Kissing Momene Mo M 3 3 food crops in cleanup
16 MANGANGO MANGANGO Piters Fernando Momene Mo M 100 100 food crops in cleanup
17 TABIE TABIE Thubaut Hubert Katembo Mbanga 100 100 food crops in cleanup
18 TABIE TABIE Van Boie Gahunga Ruti 100 100 food crops in cleanup
19 MANGANGO MANGANGO Bousman Léopold Chimanuka 55 55 food crops in cleanup
20 NYALEKE NYALEKE Nerinks Kambale Machozi 68 68 food crops in cleanup
21 TABIE TABIE Matarangas Kalinda Rukisi 127 127 food crops in cleanup
22 MUNDUBIENA MUNDUBIENA Paluku Sivirwa Ngba Mwana 80 80 food crops in cleanup
23 MANGANGO MANGANGO Kura Sulemani Ngba Mwana 50 50 food crops in cleanup
24 MAVIVI MAVIVI Zaphrakis SOZADECHANGES 160 160 food crops in cleanup
15 | P a g e
25 ANDELEA ANDELEA Lurkin Félicien Amisi 50 50 food crops
Became Maba
village
26 ANDELEA ANDELEA Merner Guy Amisi 50 50 food crops in cleanup
27 LUBENA LUBENA Butten Fryears Amisi 75 75 food crops in cleanup
28 MALONDO MALONDO Pirard Saleh Bin Saleh 50 50 food crops in cleanup
29 LUHULE LUHULE Van Ancker Lievin Saleh Bin Saleh 100 100 food crops in cleanup
30 INGOBO INGOBO Van Roie Ntite TshiEnda 50 50 food crops in cleanup
31 MAY MOYA MAY MOYA Maio de Souze CUGEKI/Butembo 100 100 food crops in cleanup
32 TUNGUDU TUNGUDU Ophoven Anguwandia Diunu 125 25 Oil palm vieux palmiers
33 MAMBUNE MAMBUNE Gregorio Kasereka Mukand 75,34 food crops in cleanup
34 MALIOBA MALIOBA Jaumin et Van Roie Kakule Kyoghero 100 100 Oil palm, food crops in cleanup
35 KATWAKAVANI
KATWAKAVA
NI Jaumin et Van Roie Muhindo Kyuma 256 food crops in cleanup
36 DUDUANZI DUDUANZI jaumin et Van Roie Muhindo Kyuma 2 2 food crops in cleanup
37 MAMBOLIO MAMBOLIO Michel Ernest Kapitula 75 75 food crops in cleanup
38 KONGOLI KIMA KONGOLI KIMA CNKI block Mumbere Ndianabo 272 food crops in cleanup
39 MAMBUNE MAMBUNE Jaumin Marcel Kyoma Malikidogo 71 food crops in cleanup
40 LUHULE LUHULE Sweron Maître Ghiofa 75 75 food crops in cleanup
41 BLOC KISANGANI Sweron Maître Ghiofa 182 food crops population
42 TABI TABI Van Ardes Rutanuka 100 100 food crops population
43 MANZAMUNDO MANZAMUNDO CNKI block Van Hoof Louis 84 84 food crops population
44 MADIWE KIBWE MADIWE KIBWE CNKI block Van Hoof Louis 100 100 food crops population
45 ALOYA MADIWE ALOYA MADIWE CNKI block Van Hoof Louis 90 90 food crops population
46 MAMBENA MAMBENA CNKI block Kasereka Kasi 400 400 food crops population
47 MANZAMUNDO
MANZAMUND
O CNKI block Katembo Vuma 100 100 food crops population
48 MANZAMUNDO
MANZAMUND
O Pierrard Katembo Vuma 120 120 food crops population
49 MASANGI MASANGI Pierrard Kayembe Manda 65 food crops population
50 MALONDO MALONDO Lagière Claude Kayembe Manda 50 50 food crops population
51 MALONDO MALONDO CNKI block Kayembe Manda 50 50 food crops population
52 TABI TABI CNKI block Millor Roger 131 131 food crops population
53 TABI TABI CNKI block Millor Roger 80 80 food crops population
54 TABI TABI CNKI block Millor Roger 98 98 food crops population
55 TABI TABI CNKI block Millor Roger 78 food crops population
16 | P a g e
56 LUHULE MADIWE LUHULE MADIWE CNKI block Pick Bing Marc 125 food crops population
57 LUHULE MADIWE LUHULE MADIWE CNKI block Pick Bing Marc 114 114 food crops population
58 LUHULE MADIWE LUHULE MADIWE CNKI block Pick Bing Marc 100 100 food crops population
6802
6. RUTSHURU TERRITORY
1 NYABIKORO gpt Jomba Baeten Ndemeye 21 18 Quinquina maintained
2 NYAKARIBA gpt Jomba Kambale Ndemeye 48 7 Quinquina maintained
3 KALENGE gpt Jomba Quinet Rwakabuba 48 Quinquina maintained
4 TSHENGERE I gpt Jomba PHARMAKINA PHARMAKINA 190 110 Quinquina maintained
5 TSHENGERE II gpt Jomba Bertholet Bishogoro 52 Quinquina maintained
6 RUBAHIRA gpt Busanza Henri Munyatwari 132 20 Coffee arabica maintained
7 RWAMPISI gpt Busanza Vano Araut Nyiringabo 95 5 Coffee arabica maintained
8 LUBIRIZI gpt Busanza Jamar G NdezeIrivuzumwami 211 15 Coffee arabica maintained
9 BAHUGA gpt Busanza Gustine Gustine 150 Coffee arabica maintained
10 PUNGA gpt Busanza Tulken Gerard Kijibwami 202 15 coffee arab+ food crops maintained
11 RWANYANI gpt Busanza Vengetines Bahizi Kabunga 259 3 coffee arab+ food crops maintained
12 RUGARAMA gpt Busanza Lebrun Sembemba maintained
13 KANYAMAGANA gpt Busanza Lebrun Midiburo 150 6 coffee rob+food crops
Maintained
14 MUGOGO gpt Busanza Bavay Bavay 65 11 coffee rob+ food crops maintained
15 KATIKINYANGE gpt Busanza Lays Sekabuhoro 52 coffee rob+ food crops maintained
16 BUGANI II gpt Bweza N°1 Genrani Ntamashakiro 54 52 coffee trees maintained
17 KASEKE gpt Bweza Mares Gaukha Baderabusha 45 30 coffee trees maintained
18 MBIGO gpt Bweza Schimit Charles Schinit Charles 250 18,5 Quinquina maintained
19 RWAREMA gpt Bweza Comelliaux PHARMAKINA Quinquina maintained
20 BUBANGA gpt Bweza CMC/RWAKABUBA CMC/RWAKABUBA 27 Factory+coffee arab Good
MUHANGA gpt Bweza Colsen Trees Domaine de Katale 50 50 coffee arabica Good
21 RUSEKE gpt Bweza Ricohillario Aza Obito 55 coffee arabica+food crops Good
22 KAHUNGA gpt Bukoma Galvatas Nzanzu Kirarahumu 98 coffee+palm tree Good
23 KAHUNGA gpt Bukoma Tomson Kambale 26 coffee trees
24 KAYIBOSHERA gpt Bukoma Lera Constantin Kambale Tshumb 25
25 MAIBO KAHUNGA gpt Bukoma Daniz
26 KAHUNGA gpt Bukoma M, Orry Kalonga Tsisera 100 coffee trees
17 | P a g e
27 KINYANDONYI gpt Bukoma Lebrun Semey Ryamukuru 500 coffee trees
28 BUSEPENGENYI gpt Bukoma Carnien Bizimana Ndungutse 300 coffee trees
29 NYABIKWANGA gpt Bukoma Besabele Mukubanya 100
30 KANYABUSEKE gpt Bukoma Stingi Lambe Ruz Mr Remis 87
31 KAGARAT gpt Bukoma Gikoriki Rukoriki 735
32 KATORO gpt Bukoma Emile Besad Rukoriki 100
33 KANYAMONDO gpt Bukoma Corbisier Bisukiro 150
34 KISISILE gpt Bukoma Van Over Berg Domaine de Katale 143,6
35 KALEHE gpt Bukoma Debrun Domaine de Katale 250
36 NIONGERA II gpt Bukoma Michel Maro Domaine de Katale 100
37 NIONGERA III gpt Bukoma Gallaux Domaine de Katale 100
38 NIONGERA I gpt Bukoma Remy Domaine de Katale 101
39 KARAMBI gpt Bukoma Etienne Paul Domaine de Katale 63
40 BUGABO II gpt Bukoma Dhagos Ruz Mr Remis 82 coffee arabica
41 BUGABO I gpt Bukoma De Veillis Ngezayo Kambale 81
42 RWABIZO gpt Bukoma Salvi Salvo Femme Bahizi 42,5
43 KIBUTUTU gpt Bukoma CNKI block Ruz Mr Remis 80
44 MUNANIRA gpt Bukoma Derry Jean Ndeze Ndabizi 6,12 Pasture
45 MAY-YA-IVI gpt Bukoma Recoriel Kayitenkore 100 24 Banana trees
46 KATWIGURU II gpt Binza Thomson Pierre Esembe 100
47 MUZINGA gpt Binza Bahizi Bahizi Kabunga 100 coffee robusta
48 KATWIGURU III gpt Binza Leis Patrice 100 coffee robusta
49 MUSUMBA I gpt Binza De Lancer Kambere 100 coffee robusta
50 MUSUMBA II gpt Binza Baudart Tsongo 50 12 coffee robusta
51 MURAMBI I gpt Binza Baudart Long Okitora 50 15 coffee robusta
52 MURAMBI II gpt Binza Salvi Salvo Mukendi Mbuyi 50 5 coffee robusta
53 KAKWALE gpt Binza Mangat Le Jong Jean 115 15 coffee robusta
54 KASABABANDA gpt Binza Bertholet 100 coffee robusta
55 BURAMBA gpt Binza Manigini Ndabishonoye 150 5 coffee+palm trees
56 NYAMILIMA gpt Binza Thomson Pierre Eglise Catholique 100
57 KATALE qpt Kisigari Van de Vivere Domaine de Katale 451 NR coffee robusta
58 BILUMA qpt Kisigari Van de Vivere Domaine de Katale 500 NR coffee robusta
59 RWANKI qpt Kisigari Van Quen Berche Domaine de Katale 21 19 coffee robusta
60 NYABIKERE qpt Kisigari Van Quen Berche Domaine de Katale 186 NR coffee robusta
18 | P a g e
61 NYAKAGEZI qpt Kisigari Diner Domaine de Katale 135 NR coffee robusta
62 KITERANA qpt Kisigari Cavalli Domaine de Katale 61 NR coffee robusta
63 NYAKAGEZI qpt Kisigari De Brun Domaine de Katale 20 NR coffee robusta
64 KALENGERA qpt Kisigari Cavalli Domaine de Katale 228 60 coffee arabica Very good
65 KIGARAMA qpt Kisigari Rigon Freres Domaine de Katale 82 48 coffee arabica Very good
66 BUBANGA qpt Kisigari De Meuten Domaine de Katale 45 25 coffee arabica Very good
67 RUBARE qpt Kisigari 172 70 coffee arabica Very good
68 RUBARE qpt Kisigari Very good
69 KABANO qpt Kisigari Van Over Berg Domaine de Katale 48 NR coffee arabica Very good
70 ISHULO MATEBE qpt Kisigari Boel Domaine de Katale 230 NR coffee arabica Very good
71 HANGI qpt Kisigari Huwart Domaine de Katale 95 60 coffee arabica Very good
72 HANGI KIRWA qpt Kisigari Van Destein Domaine de Katale 12 8,5 coffee arabica Very good
73 BUGANI qpt Kisigari D'Anethan Domaine de Katale 51 NR coffee arabica Very good
74 KIVUNGA qpt Kisigari Donaert Franc Ndabishoboye 234 120 coffee arabica Very good
75 TSHIMA qpt Kisigari Donaert Franc Ndabishoboye 60 45 coffee arabica Very good
76 ISHASHAZA qpt Kisigari Donaert Franc Ndabishoboye 100 30 coffee arabica Very good
77 KABASENGO qpt Kisigari Sperembehie Renzaho 100 30 coffee arabica Very good
78 NYAMUHENDO qpt Kisigari Martin Rwakabuba 240 240 coffee arabica Very good
79 LUTIBA gpt Bukombo Intrever Ntindamahina 70 38
80 LUTIBA gpt Bukombo Custine Nicole Custine Nicole 50 44
81 LUTIBA gpt Bukombo Engeles Judo Habangira 96 15
82 MBUSUBUSU gpt Bukombo De Ruyck Kalinda 75 15
83 LUTIBA gpt Bukombo Versstrante Kalinda 50 40
84 NGESHO/LUTIBA gpt Bukombo Versstrante Kalinda 49,75 28,8
85 NGESHO/LUTIBA gpt Bukombo Staclens Sebatware 43 24
86 FUBWE gpt Bukombo Bucquet Aliliwali 50 19
87 KUWEBA gpt Bukombo Manager Aliliwali
88 RUBWE gpt Bukombo Bora Foum Balingene
89 CHANURWA gpt Bukombo Dupont Lucien Mpuhwe
90 FUBWE gpt Bukombo Jean Paroisse de Biramb N.R. N.R. N.R.
91 KATSIRU gpt Bukombo Engeles Judo Nzasamba N.R. N.R. N.R.
92 KATSIRU gpt Bukombo Dahathan N.R. N.R. N.R.
93 KATSIRU gpt Bukombo Verbrunger Rutijana N.R N.R. N.R.
19 | P a g e
94 BULANDA gpt Bukombo Locat Rutijana N.R. N.R. N.R.
95 KYUMBA gpt Bukombo Bieles Rutijana N.R. N.R. N.R.
96 KYUMBA gpt Bukombo Bieles Rutijana N.R. N.R. N.R.
97 RUSHEBERE gpt Bukombo Maurice jean Rutijana N.R. N.R. N.R.
98 KATSIRU II gpt Bukombo Deloo Cysille Bauma N.R. N.R. N.R.
99 KATSIRU IV gpt Bukombo Verseesch Tshani N.R N.R. N.R.
100 KATSIRU III gpt Bukombo Mme Peeters Kamanzi N.R. N.R. N.R.
101 KATSIRU IV gpt Bukombo Mm de Witer R.N.D. N.R. N.R. N.R.
102 KATYAZO gpt Bukombo Orthmyears R.N.D. N.R. N.R. N.R.
103 MWESO/HONERO gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
104 KATSIRA gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
105 KATSIRA gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R N.R. N.R.
106 KATSIRA gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
107 LUBATI gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
108 LUBATI gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
109 KAHE MARAIS gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
110 MOHE II gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
111 KIFUMBU gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R N.R. N.R.
112 MOHEIII gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
113 MOHE I gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
114 KIHONGA gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
115 KIHONGA gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
116 MUBIGO gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R N.R. N.R.
117 RUGIMBI I gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
118 RUGIMBI gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
119 GOODOBWA gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
120 KAVUO gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
121 KARAMBI gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
122 KYAHEMBA gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R N.R. N.R.
123 HIFO gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
124 NGORA gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
125 NGESHO gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
126 NGESHO gpt Bishusha N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
127 KITWA KISHAM gpt Kihondo N.R. N.R N.R N.R. N.R.
20 | P a g e
128 MALAMA gpt Kihondo N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
129 MOTO MOYA gpt Kihondo N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
130 BUSIGHA gpt Kanyabayonga N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
131 BITONGI I
gpt
Kanyabayonga N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
132 KITIBITO gpt Kanyabayonga N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
133
DESCHOUTTE
STE N.R. N.R N.R N.R. N.R.
134 NYANZALE gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
135 BUSURURURU gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
136 KINYATSI II gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
137 IKALE gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
138 gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R N.R. N.R.
139 gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
140 gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
141 gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
142 gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
143 RUSIGHA gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
144 KABILANGIRIRO gpt Mutand N.R. N.R N.R N.R. N.R. .
145 KAHUKO gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
146 KABATI II gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
147 KABATI II gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
148 KABATI MUTI gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
149 MUSHEBESHEBE
gpt
Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R. .
150 KYANGOMA gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
151 MUTANDA I gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
152 MUTANDA II gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R N.R. N.R.
153 KILIMA I gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
154 KILIMA II gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
155 KILIMA III gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
156 KIBUNGU gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
157 KALUMBIA gpt Mutanda N.R. N.R N.R. N.R. N.R.
21 | P a g e
III.2. LIST OF FARMS IN NORTH KIVU
1. RUTSHURU TERRITORY
N°
NAME OF THE
FARM LOCATION
FORMER
OWNER NAME OF ACQUIRER TITLE OF OCCUPATION
TOTAL
AREA
IN
VALUE SPECULATION OBSERVATION
1 ISHASHAZA gpt Binza Goodard Farncis Ndeze Ndabishobo 10030 Livestock rearing, caprins maintained
2 LUBWE SUD gpt Kihondo Plantinkx Buunda Birere 125 120 Livestock rearing, maintained
3 NGESHO gpt Bishusha Sapieha Adam Mwenenge Afamasa 189,5 111 Livestock rearing Not maintained
4 LUBATI gpt Bishusha Ghilain Jean Mwenenge Afamasa 109,7 103 Livestock rearing Not maintained
5 KINYATSI III gpt Kihondo
Mme Renard Van
PE Nzabakurukiza 68 35 Livestock rearing Maintained
6 KINYATSI III gpt Kihondo Van PEE EPS Nzabakurukiza 295 295 Livestock rearing maintained
7 LUBWE NORD gpt Kihondo GEER Roger CECUBWI 120 10 Livestock rearing maintained
8 KITWA KESH gpt Kihondo Mouche Pierre Semuchacha 110 60 Livestock rearing maintained
9 MUTU MOYA gpt Jomba Colle Etienne Kakule Kahita 228 8 Livestock rearing maintained
10 MUNZIRARWE gpt Jomba Dementen Musonerwa 15 15 Livestock rearing maintained
11 KINYANGURUBE gpt Jomba Dementen Musonerwa 15 15 Livestock rearing maintained
12 KAMIRA gpt Jomba Comellion Segihobe 74 74 Livestock rearing maintained
13 SINGA gpt Busanza Lebrun Rwamukuru 192 192 Livestock rearing maintained
14 RUGARAMA gpt Busanza Lebrun Sembeba Livestock rearing maintained
15 KANYAMAGANA III gpt Busanza Lebrun Kibiribiri 156 156 Livestock rearing maintained
16 CHIBUMBA GAHINGA gpt Bweza Gatsama 70 50 Livestock rearing maintained
17 KANYABUSORO gpt Bweza Trout Munyarubega 25 Livestock rearing maintained
18 BUREKEKENYE gpt Bukoma Renten Kibiribiri 156 Livestock rearing maintained
19 KATEMBA gpt Bukoma Salvio Salvo Ngezayo 81 81 Livestock rearing maintained
20 BUHIMBA gpt Bukoma De sa Delier Kasongo Shuyaka 65 65 Livestock rearing Not maintained
21 BUGINA gpt Bukoma Norfreel Kalombo 70 Livestock rearing Not maintained
22 KAHUNGA gpt Bukoma Kayuzi 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained
22 | P a g e
23 KATWIGURU I gpt Binza Van Nebrun Munyamihana 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained
24 BUMA gpt Binza Ackermas M Ndeze Irivuzumwami 100 100 Livestock rearing maintained
25 MUSUMBA II gpt Binza Steckers Mbeza Mihigo 67,5 60 Livestock rearing maintained
26 BINWABIKE/LUTIBA gpt Bukombo Verstraete Kalinda Sekwekwe 60 60 Livestock rearing maintained
27 MUHANGA gpt Bukombo Van de Halle Kibingi 101 30 Livestock rearing maintained
28 KANYABUBUNGA gpt Bukombo Van de Halle Mukama 50 35 Livestock rearing maintained
29 LUTIBA gpt Bukombo Windey Lucien Kabuyaya 85,87 30 Livestock rearing maintained
30 BINWABIRE I gpt Bukombo Verbrungen Ndebereya 58 Livestock rearing maintained
31 BINWABIRE I gpt Bukombo Van de kels Chiza Muhigirwa 50 40 Livestock rearing maintained
32 LUTIBA gpt Bukombo Brouskavet Chiza Moromoro 50 47 Livestock rearing maintained
33 LUTIBA gpt Bukombo Deschyver Paroisse Birambizo 64 35ha Livestock rearing maintained
34 KATSIRU I gpt Bukombo Verbrungen Rutijana sebahire 20 20 Livestock rearing maintained
35 KYUMBA gpt Bukombo Bielies Rutijana sebahire 35 35 Livestock rearing maintained
36 KATSIRU III gpt Bukombo Pelters Kamanzi 50 30 Livestock rearing maintained
37 REMERA I gpt Kihondo Kaberuka Kaberuka 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained
38 KIHONGA gpt Kihondo Bielies Kaberuka 200 Livestock rearing maintained
39 NYABINO II gpt Mutanda Deschoutteste Shika Higiro 118 60 Livestock rearing maintained
40 MUSHIKIRI I gpt Mutanda Jumer Gatanazi 123 70 Livestock rearing maintained
41 MUSHIKIRI II gpt Mutanda Stekers Rwigema 262 50 Livestock rearing maintained
42 BIRISHEKE gpt Mutanda Praie Jules Mbishibishi 246 98 Livestock rearing maintained
43 KATWE KITOBOLO gpt Mutanda Staclers Michel Buunda Birere 80 38 Livestock rearing maintained
44 50 30 Livestock rearing maintained
45
46 KAGUO gpt Bishusha Drion Duchapos Nzabakurikiza 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained
47 KIRURUMA gpt Kihondo Kaberuka Kaberuka 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained
48 IBAMBE IBAMBE
Service
véterinaire Wambugha 259 Livestock rearing maintained
49 KABARUNDI KABARUNDI Drion Duchapos Nzabakurikiza 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained
50 NYAMIRAMIRWA NYAMIRAMIRWA Comeliau Segihobe 74 maintained
51 KITUNDA gpt Kihondo Goodne André Majabo 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained
52 LUNGA Lunga Blon Del Jean Rév Sehene 47 47 Livestock rearing maintained
53 LUBWE NORD Lubwe Roger Ogez Gecubwi 80 88 Livestock rearing maintained
TOTAL RUTSHURU 4944,57
2. BENI TERRITORY
23 | P a g e
1 LUMETALYA LUMETALYA Engelen Van Hoof 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained
2 MGOODAYA MGOODAYA Ingels SODAIR 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained
3 MIHUNGA MIHUNGA Ingels SODAIR 170 170 Livestock rearing maintained
4 KYAVISALE KYAVISALE Debremacker Paluku Mutogherwa 99 99 Livestock rearing maintained
5 LWAMISO I LWAMISO I Seneque Paluku Nzoumwa 18 18 Livestock rearing maintained
6 MUHORARO MUHORARO Ingels Ngeleza 150 150 Livestock rearing maintained
7 KANYATSI KANYATSI Mr et Mme Galas Katsuva 18 18 Livestock rearing maintained
8 KILIA KILIA/Mutwanga SODAIR 126,5 126,5 Livestock rearing maintained
9 BIAKOVE BIAKOVE Userding Sivaheswa 100 100 Livestock rearing maintained
10 MAPATA MAPATA Cossee se Sem Colyphtone 100 100 Livestock rearing maintained
11 SULA Bloc SULA Jaumin Marcel Goodabana 34 34 Livestock rearing maintained
12 SULA Bloc SULA De Borggrave Goodabana 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained
13 MILIMA MILIMA Lortie Joel N’Sele 250 250 Livestock rearing maintained
14 KARIMUMBA KARIMUMBA Lortie Joel Kasonia 435 435 Livestock rearing maintained
15 BUNTORA BUNTORA Siroux Fernard Kambale 28 28 Livestock rearing maintained
16 MAVONO MAVONO Lafont Pierre Kahindo Kaviti 36 36 Livestock rearing maintained
17 VUNERERE VUNERERE Bourgs Charles Katunda 14 14 Livestock rearing maintained
18 MOLA MOLA Userding Kakule 35 35 Livestock rearing maintained
19 LUHULE LUHULE Mme Hallin Kayiyembako 15 15 Livestock rearing maintained
20 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained
21 SULA Bloc SULA Thirat Hubert Shabantu Kimayi 120 120 Livestock rearing maintained
22 SULA Bloc SULA Deslahaut J Shabantu Kimayi 25 25 Livestock rearing maintained
23 SULA Bloc SULA Crucitix Shabantu Kimayi 70 70 Livestock rearing maintained
24 BUSINGWA BUSINGWA De Bremacker Muhindo Kyuma 86,67 86,67 Livestock rearing maintained
25 MUTAMBI MUTAMBI Senioutovitch Mbavuvoja 52 52 Livestock rearing maintained
26 BULIKI BULIKI Broos Armand Bwanakawa 150 150 Livestock rearing maintained
27 BIAKOBE BIAKOBE Gevaert Singa 75 75 Livestock rearing maintained
28 KASAMBIRI KASAMBIRI CNKI block Musungo 212 212 Livestock rearing maintained
29 BIAKOBE BIAKOBE CNKI block Mwenge Katungo 155,91 155,9 Livestock rearing maintained
30 LUMETALYA LUMETALYA Chavier SOCOREZA 284 284 Livestock rearing maintained
TOTAL BENI
3059,08 3059
3. NYIRAGONGO TERRITORY
1 KIGERI KIGERI COMBIGUE MAKABUZA Contract N°2448.321,9321 21,53 21 Livestock rearing maintained
24 | P a g e
2 KIBIRIGA KIBIRIGA LOIQ MAKABUZA D8/0623137 37 31 Livestock rearing maintained
3 KIBIRIGA KIBIRIGA CUSTINE MAKABUZA D8/E13936,6136 36,61 36 Livestock rearing maintained
4 RWANGUBA RWANGUBA LELUVRE NDEZE IRIVUZUM 37 30 Livestock rearing maintained
TOTAL NYIRAGONGO 126,54 120
4. LUBERO TERRITORY
1 MAHUKA MAHUKA MERGAUX Kambere Muhima 410 100 Livestock rearing maintained
2 BIKARA+WIMBI BIKARA+WIMBI DE LEUZE Paluku Mutongerwa 350 300 Livestock rearing maintained
3 KANYAMBI KANYAMBI DE LEUZE Paluku Mutongerwa 100 80 Livestock rearing maintained
4 KIHEMBA KIHEMBA TRIGALLEZ CAPACO/Beni Livestock rearing maintained
5 KASEA KASEA TRIGALLEZ CAPACO/Beni 40 40 Livestock rearing maintained
6 KATALE KATALE WOMARYEARS CAPACO/Beni Livestock rearing maintained
7 KIHEMBA KIHEMBA TWSTAPLES CAPACO/Beni 25 25 Livestock rearing maintained
8 LININE LININE ENGELBRECHT CAPACO/Beni 49 49 Livestock rearing maintained
9 KATWAKAVAKWE KATWAKAVAKWE DE BOGOODIE CAPACO/Beni 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained
10 BISIGHO BISIGHO MERGAUX Tembo Mwambuli NR NR Livestock rearing maintained
11 NDEKO NDEKO MALFEYT Paluku Kagheni 70 70 Livestock rearing maintained
12 BIKARA+WIMBI BIKARA+WIMBI DAVREAUX Muhindo Kakwenz 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained
13 KABIRO II KABIRO II
DE
KERCKHOVE Kambale Musiyera 120 50 Livestock rearing maintained
14 KAVALI KAVALI BROSSENS Kambale Katimba 100 80 Livestock rearing maintained
15 KIMBULU KIMBULU ALMEIDA Sindani Hangi 70 60 Livestock rearing maintained
16 KANIERE KANIERE CNKI Kambale Katimba 360 80 Livestock rearing maintained
17 LUSUKWE Parc n°6 LUSUKWE Mme CARIOTIS Muhindo Bayani 50 45 Livestock rearing maintained
18 LUSUKWE Parc n°7 LUSUKWE Mme CARIOTIS Kambale Saaine 85 50 Livestock rearing maintained
19 KINYAMILUMBI KINYAMILUMBI MOREAUX Kambale Kyavire 180 180 Livestock rearing maintained
20 KATOVO KATOVO kasai Musubao 240 100 Livestock rearing maintained
21 KINYAMILALA KINYAMILALA VAN HOUT kakule kaskoti 100 60 Livestock rearing maintained
22 KYALUMGOODO KYALUMGOODO kambale kyavire 126 70 Livestock rearing maintained
23 MUTENGA MUTENGA Katsuva Kimbesa 198 80 Livestock rearing maintained
24 VUSIGHO VUSIGHO ROUSSEAUX Muheko Kahindo 70 70 Livestock rearing maintained
25 BUTUNDULA BUTUNDULA ANDRE Mwigha Masinda 110 100 Livestock rearing maintained
26 LUKWALIHA LUKWALIHA CNKI Kasereka 120 90 Livestock rearing maintained
27 BUSESA BUSESA VOUTERS Kastuva Mutambo 100 60 Livestock rearing maintained
28 KALEMBA/NGUBI KALEMBA/NGUBI D'HALEWIN Mahuka Nganza 50 40 Livestock rearing maintained
25 | P a g e
29 LWANGONGO Parc n°17 KAYNA CNKI Karushya 100 100 Livestock rearing maintained
30
LWANGONGO Parc
n°15 KAYNA CNKI Karushya 102 102 Livestock rearing maintained
31 LWANGONGO Parc n°9 KAYNA CNKI Semakuba 100 70 Livestock rearing maintained
32
LWANGONGO Parc
n°19 KAYNA CNKI Kahambu Kiluhu 100 90 Livestock rearing maintained
33 LWANGONGO Parc n°20 KAYNA CNKI Kambale Katehi 100 100 Livestock rearing maintained
34
LWANGONGO Parc
n°16 KAYNA CNKI Kambale Muhindo 100 100 Livestock rearing maintained
35 LWANGONGO Parc n°21 KAYNA CNKI Paluku Kabunga 105 105 Livestock rearing maintained
36
LWANGONGO Parc
n°18 KAYNA CNKI Paluku Kabunga 139 139 Livestock rearing maintained
37 KAHOHA KAHOHA CNKI Kambale Kihuhani 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained
38
LWANGONGO Parc
n°4 KAYNA CNKI Muhindo Kyavakama 100 100 Livestock rearing maintained
39 LUHAHI II LUHAHI CNKI Mkambale Wasim 50 50 Livestock rearing maintained
TOTAL LUBERO
4269 2985
5. MASISI TERRITORY
1 LUSHEBERE LUSHEBERE HEPP Diocèse de Goma 200 200 pastureland
2 KATALE KATALE VANDER B Ndakola 50 50 pastureland
3 KATALE KATALE VANDER B Ndakola 20 20 pastureland
4 KATALE KATALE VANDER B Ndakola 16 16 pastureland
5 MUFA MUFA VANDER B Ndakola 103 103 pastureland+crop
6 MUFA MUFA CNKI BLOCK Ndakola 108 108 pastureland+crop
7 TONDO TONDO DUPREZ Mwananteba 200 200 pastureland+crop
8 KITU MAHANGA KITU MAHANGA DUPREZ Mwananteba 120 pastureland
9 KAZIHIRO KAZIHIRO
CNKI
BLOCK Dhani 150 pastureland+crop
10 MABINGO MABINGO
Mme
BREBOSIA Mishonya 100 pastureland+crop
11 MBIZI MBIZI
BLOC
MBIZI Uwimana 111,2 pastureland+crop
12 MUFA MUFA
BLOC
MBIZI Uwimana 58 pastureland+crop
13 MUFA MUFA
HEDO
REGUL Uwimana 50 pastureland+crop
26 | P a g e
14 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE DELVAUX Rutsindula 90 pastureland+crop
15 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE DELVAUX Rutsindula 50 pastureland+crop
16 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE DELVAUX Rutsindula 50 pastureland+crop
17 MBIZI MBIZI
BLOC
MBIZI Dhani 50 pastureland+crop
18 MBIZI MBIZI BLOC MBIZI Mkanirwa 89,25 pastureland+crop
19 BUHALA BUHALA
VENDER
STCHEL Kulu 174 pastureland+crop
20 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Bizima Kara 81 81 pastureland
21 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA
CNKI
BLOCK Bizima Kara 53 53 pastureland
22 TSHANGULUBE ETSHANGULUB CNKI BLOCK Makabuza 129 pastureland
23 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE DELVAUX Ndakola 117 pastureland
24 MBIZI MBIZI
BLOC
MBIZI Bizima Kara 156 pastureland+crop
25 MBIZI MBIZI
BLOC
MBIZI Ndakola 200 pastureland
26 MBIZI MBIZI
CNKI
BLOCK Tukabintabu 120 pastureland+crop
27 MBIZI MBIZI
CNKI
BLOCK Kakwene 120 pastureland+crop
28 BUHENDA BUHENDA CAUWE Gahunga 150 pastureland+reafforestatio
29 KISHINGIRI KISHINGIRI Mme BREBOSIA Mukaruryearswa 98 pastureland+crop
30 MBIZI MBIZI
CNKI
BLOCK Kasoza 98 pastureland+crop
31 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Tukabintabu 95 95 pastureland+reafforestation
32 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA
CNKI
BLOCK 16,1 16,1 pastureland+crop
33 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Tukabintabu 34 34 pastureland+reafforestation
34 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA
CNKI
BLOCK Tukabintabu 25 25 pastureland
35 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE DESCHOT MICHEL Kaneno Muhombo 50 50 pastureland+crop
36 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE
DESCHOT
MICHEL Kaneno Muhombo 49 49 pastureland+crop
37 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE DESCHOT MICHEL Kaneno Muhombo 44 44 pastureland+crop
38 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA
CNKI
BLOCK Safi 127 127 pastureland
27 | P a g e
39 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Makabuza 128 128 pastureland
40 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA
CNKI
BLOCK Makabuza 96 96 pastureland
41 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE CNKI BLOCK Muhutu 30,7 30,7 pastureland
42 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE
CNKI
BLOCK Naguru 50 50 pastureland+reafforestation
43 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Serushago 62 62 pastureland
44 MBIZI MBIZI
CNKI
BLOCK Mishiki 65 65 pastureland+crop
45 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Kashani 180 pastureland+crop
46 MBIZI MBIZI
CNKI
BLOCK Gakwene 55 pastureland+crop
47 NYABIONDO NYABIONDO CNKI BLOCK Shamamba 29 pastureland+crop
48 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE
CNKI
BLOCK Kamudoga 50 pastureland+crop
49 MURAMBI MURAMBI CNKI BLOCK Néo Apostolique 117 pastureland+crop
50 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE
CNKI
BLOCK Ritaganirwa 38 pastureland+crop
51 TSIRU MUFA TSIRU MUFA CNKI BLOCK Ndaalitsa 195 pastureland+crop
52 MURAMBI MURAMBI
CNKI
BLOCK Néo Apostolique 92 pastureland+crop
53 KAHASHA KAHASHA CNKI BLOCK Mutaka 222 pastureland+crop
54 KAHASHA KAHASHA
CNKI
BLOCK Mutaka 118 pastureland+crop
55 KAHASHA KAHASHA CNKI BLOCK Ndakola 111 pastureland+crop
56 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA
CNKI
BLOCK Bizima Karah 148 pastureland+crop
57 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Kalinda 100 pastureland+crop
58 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA
CNKI
BLOCK Kalinda 50 pastureland+crop
59 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Kalinda pastureland+crop
60 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA
CNKI
BLOCK Kalinda pastureland+crop
61 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE CNKI BLOCK Ntakaziharo 39,5 pastureland+crop
62 KIFUMWE KIFUMWE CNKI Ntakaziharo 31 pastureland+crop
28 | P a g e
BLOCK
63 LUAMA III LUAMA III CROBBE Nkizingiko 60 pastureland+crop
64 LUAMA LUAMA CROBBE Nkizingiko 65 pastureland+crop
65 CHUNGO BLOC CHUNGO BLOC CROBBE Nkizingiko 40 pastureland+crop
66 MUHANGA MUHANGA
CNKI
BLOCK Ndakola 150 pastureland+crop
67 RUSIKA RUSIKA
CNKI
BLOCK Karuganda 80 80 pastureland+crop
68 LUSHEBERE LUSHEBERE
CNKI
BLOCK Ndakadayu 60 60 pastureland+crop
69 KIKOMA KIKOMA
CNKI
BLOCK Mulengezi 147 pastureland+crop
70 CHUNGO BLOC CHUNGO BLOC
CNKI
BLOCK Nkizingike 40 pastureland+crop
71 LUAMA LUAMA GENARRI Banziziki 82 pastureland+crop
72 LUAMA LUAMA BATIN Banziziki 42 pastureland+crop
73 LUAMA LUAMA VARHALST Sekayange 80 pastureland+crop
74 LUAMA LUAMA VARHALST Mbekoet pastureland+crop
75 NDALAGA NDALAGA DUMON COCOBU 200 200 pastureland+crop
76 NDALAGA NDALAGA DUMON Habyambere 82 82 pastureland+crop
77 BUBOKO BUBOKO MARCHAL Budoni 119 119 pastureland+crop
78 BIRAMBIZO BIRAMBIZO DUVON Monastère/Mokoto 33 33 pastureland+crop
79 KIHIMBA KIHIMBA DEWIT Bisukiro 14 14 pastureland+crop
80 NGURU NGURU DAPREZ Sakina 50 50 pastureland+crop
81 KAHIRA KAHIRA ERNOTTE Muhindo 50 pastureland+crop
82 NGURU NGURU DEPREZ Rwakineza 50 pastureland+crop
83 LUAMA LUAMA BRAKAEN Mukengango 63 pastureland+crop
84 TSHUNGO TSHUNGO DEHERCH Ngerageze 120 pastureland+crop
85 MUSHWA MUSHWA CNKI BLOCK Ruhinya 112 112 pastureland+crop
86 MUSHWA MUSHWA
CNKI
BLOCK Miburo 118 118 pastureland+crop
87 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Miburo 98 98 pastureland+crop
88 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA
CNKI
BLOCK Balinda 200 200 pastureland+crop
89 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Kabanda 130 130 pastureland+crop
90 BUMBA BUMBA KALINDA Buyore 114 pastureland+crop
29 | P a g e
91 NYARUNABA NYARUNABA CNKI BLOCK Nguringoma 171,5 100 pastureland+crop
92 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA
CNKI
BLOCK Gasasita 400 370 pastureland+crop
93 NYARUNABA NYARUNABA BUNVANTORE Ntunyanzo 171 100 pastureland+crop
94 BUMBA BUMBA Byoyoyo 146 100 pastureland+crop
95 BUHULE BUHULE Komayombi 60 60 pastureland+crop
96 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA Komayombi 60 60 pastureland+crop
97 KAUNDU KAUNDU Serufuli 600 pastureland+crop
98 OSSO OSSO Bisengimana 1000 900 pastureland+crop
99 BUNYOLE BUNYOLE
MINENCHI
N Ngezayo 200 200 pastureland+crop
100 MUSHUNUNU MUSHUNUNU KALINDA Ngezayo 100 100 pastureland+crop
101 KASHASHA KASHASHA SHABA Mugenzi NR NR pastureland+crop
102 MIRUMBA MIRUMBA KASUKU Karuretwa 63 pastureland+crop
103 MUSHUNUNU MUSHUNUNU Rwabahenda pastureland+crop
104 KAHASHA KAHASHA CNKI BLOCK Ndakola 112 pastureland+crop
105 MBIZI MBIZI
CNKI
BLOCK Mbua 24 pastureland+crop
106 MUKOHWA MUKOHWA Mme ROMBEAU Kasese 100 pastureland+crop
107 MUKOHWA MUKOHWA
CNKI
BLOCK Mastaki 50 pastureland+crop
108
109 LULAMBO LULAMBO
CNKI
BLOCK Karunganda 170 pastureland+crop
110 RUSIKA RUSIKA
CNKI
BLOCK Kaboyi 30 pastureland+crop
111 NGUNGU NGUNGU Mme SHARE Rusangiza pastureland+crop
112 NGUNGU NGUNGU Rubibi 103 pastureland+crop
113 NGUNGU NGUNGU MEYA ALBERT Mbarusha 58 pastureland+crop
114 NGUNGU NGUNGU
MOUS
AMBROISE Bitegesimana 43 pastureland+crop
115 NGUNGU NGUNGU NOUSPEIGNOUS Kitsa Mutumayi 30 pastureland+crop
116 NGUNGU NGUNGU VIET BORS Kabera 50 pastureland+crop
117 NGUNGU NGUNGU Mlle GRUME Kajibwana 50 pastureland+crop
118 BISHASHA BISHASHA MICHELAR Ndachombenze 118 pastureland+crop
30 | P a g e
119 BISHASHA BISHASHA Nkundaka pastureland+crop
120 BUMBA BUMBA DERONDE Ndahombakare 100 pastureland+crop
121 TEBERO TEBERO LEON Bulenda 91 pastureland+crop
122 MUANVURA MUANVURA PONEELET Ngaeyo 36 pastureland+crop
123 MUANVURA MUANVURA
BORNYEAR
S Karangwa 81 pastureland+crop
124 MUKOBERWA MUKOBERWA DUMON Gahananyi 100 pastureland+crop
125 MUHANIRA MUHANIRA
BANDENHE
UVE Kanyove 50 pastureland+crop
126 MUHANIRA MUHANIRA
BANDENHE
UVE Kabasha Ngabo 85 pastureland+crop
127 KITONDO KITONDO GILWER Habarugira 290 pastureland+crop
128 LUMBICHI LUMBICHI GILWER Kanyanduki 167 pastureland+crop
129 KIROLIRWE KIROLIRWE AUGUSTE Karamuhetu 60 pastureland+crop
130 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Kaurwa 32 pastureland+crop
131 MBIZI MBIZI
CNKI
BLOCK Kinyakura 174 pastureland+crop
132 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Malira 64 pastureland+crop
133 MBIZI MBIZI
CNKI
BLOCK Muhima pastureland+crop
134 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Serenge 22 pastureland+crop
135 MBIZI MBIZI
CNKI
BLOCK Population 112 pastureland+crop
136 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Kasoza 98 pastureland+crop
137 KABATI KISUMA
CNKI
BLOCK Tukabintabu 95 pastureland+crop
138 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Tukabintabu 16,1 pastureland+crop
139 KATUHUNDA KATUHUNDA
MmE
CORMANE Matabishi 63 pastureland
140 KATUHUNDA KATUHUNDA PATERROIL Matabishi 100 pastureland
141 MBIZI MBIZI
CNKI
BLOCK Nguba 14 pastureland
142 KABATI KISUMA DRIEX Pay Pay 109 pastureland
143 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA DRIEX Pay Pay 114 pastureland
144 RUVUNDA RUVUNDA JOSEPH Kamari 70 pastureland
145 RUSHENGO RUSHENGO BOLOGNE Muhambikwa 129 pastureland
146 RUVUNDA RUVUNDA MENAGER Kinangabo 71 pastureland
31 | P a g e
147 RUSHENGO II RUSHENGO II BOLOGNE Kulange 125 pastureland
148 RUVUNDA II RUVUNDA II
MEGNEGNI
NER Baziaka 55 pastureland
TOTAL MASISI
14390,35
32 | P a g e
III.3. COMMENTS ON THESE DATA.
3.1. General comments:
The data presented reflects unease in the land management system in North Kivu province for
several reasons.
- First, the inability of land services department to avail and update timely reliable data.
- Failure to manage real information on the ground concerning titles issued.
- The lack of willingness by land actors to facilitate the work of the land services
department to have all the data.
- A weakness in the land services department to impose policies on various actors.
- Then, this problem gives rise to a number of hypotheses which must be clarified
concerning the following issue:
1. Who profits from this disorderly situation?
2. Why are the interested parties not in a hurry to regularize neither to make
known their rights on these when demanding their right of ownership?
3. Must we really think that these rights are not protected so much by the
documents?
3.2. Specific comments.
3.2.1. According to the security documents, we realized that for those who have the
documents or say those who availed the documents to us, the study found 7
types of documents namely:
- Certificate of ownership.
- Certificate of occupation.
- Allotment letter.
- Request for land.
- Certificate.
- Contract.
- Transfer certificate.
If some are registered in the nomenclature of Congolese land legislation, others on the
contrary find their value in the legitimacy finally there are others who would be qualified by
documents delivered by anon competent authority.
For legal documents, it should be noted: the certificate, the contract, the request for land.
On the contrary the following documents are legitimate: transfer certificate, certificate of
ownership, certificate of occupation and the allotment letter.
3.2.2. In relation to the high number of farms and plantations whose information was
not available:
It should be emphasized that the data are not available are concentrated in one group. These
groups are MUTANDA BUKOMBO and BISHUSHA. Regarding the latter, a high density of
conflict and insecurity due to land disputes not resolved by the courts should be noted. Added
to this is the inability of successive authorities to resolve the conflict around the
customary/traditional power that opposes the ruling families.
We found ourselves in a situation, where the local land titles office refers to the provincial
office while the latter refers to the office of the division of the territory that is supposed to
manage this issue.
The direct consequence is that the owners of these plantations are not only land insecure, but
also the local people do not really know where to go when negotiating the rights to exploit
these vast areas sometimes not entirely exploited.
What is also true, the rightful owners of these plantations do not want most of times to put
themselves to risk as belonging to one or another camp of the royal families in conflict.
33 | P a g e
It is very likely that the operations of land sales have taken place during the customary power
struggles that led to land dispossession of many households of small producers.
3.2.3. CNKI blocks, or the National Committee of Kivu:
Created in 1928 by the colonial power, CNKI distributed them to settles for
agricultural exploitations or farms. These blocks have been grabbed by the ruling
elite. The National Committee of Kivu had acquired during its creation « the
monopoly of land management corresponding to the former Kivu district. Based on a
survey work, the committee constituted “colonization blocks” (land considered
suitable for agriculture and livestock sectors) which they hired to European settlers».
With the end of colonization, and with the new land law and nationalization followed by
radical changes, the state has recovered these areas and distributed, to the dismay of local
people, to some political elites obedient to Mobutu at that time.
In fact, while the population, who had felt dispossessed of their land, thought they would
recover land from the hands of settlers after independence and later with the drastic measures
from the Mobutu regime. These large areas were simply taken over by private agricultural
actors. We can mention that among these actors are politicians, economists and intellectuals.
Only a block continues to be exploited by local people after many struggles that were
sometimes bloody clashes in the region. This is KIPFUMU block in MASISI territory with an
estimated area of 120 hectares.
The current exploiters sometimes have titles that the relevant departments do not recognize
but not according to the words of those responsible according to our meeting of 20th
February
at the land titles office in Goma town.
The concerned said that we must first of all exhaust the process of decommisioning in order to
assign these lands to particular exploiters/operators.
The head of works Fr X. SEBAKUNZI Ntibuka, in « the political dimension in land conflicts
in the mountains of Kivu: conflicts between KALINDA and BUCYANAYANDI in MASISI
territory » believes that CNKI was managing about 96732 ha or 967,32 Km2.
He also says that « the settlers carve out large plantations and livestock farms (Nyabiondo:
2500ha, Loashi 1050 ha, Lubaya 2360ha…) from high value productive land taken away form
the indigenous people. In total 15860 ha was taken over by plantations ». The difference
between these data from C.T SEBAKUNZI and ours finds its explantation in the fact that
some exploitors/operators know how to withdraw their transfer certificates from the liste of
CNKI blocks by obtaining title deeds from various relevent authorities.
The issue of management of CNKI recovery divide the actors in North Kivu province.
On the one hand, the administration believes that under the law, all these blocks are incomes
from state land. In addition, it was decided by the administration that CNKI has the
monopoly to manage all these issues.
Nevertheless, to be exploited by third parties, these blocks must first of all be regulated.
Which did not seem to be the case for several among them..
On the other hand, the customary leaders continue to think that they must revover the lands
which were taken from them by an arbitrary decision, with neither prior compensation nor
consultation.
Finally, the populations, through their organizations believe that these lands should be
allocated to the local sorounding communities’ because they have less and less
arable/cultivable land given the soaring population pressure.
In total, about 13700 hectares are owned or better said «grabbed» by private actors
mentionned above at the expense of the local populations as indicated in the table below:
IV. CNKI BLOCKS : NATIONAL COMMITTEE OF KIVU
34 | P a g e
Several land distributed by CNKI were owned by various actors. This was to the great shock
of the local communities. The table below presents the situation of these lands just after
recovery by the Congolese state.
Table n° ______LIST OF FARMS AND PLANTATIONS BELONGING TO CNKI
BLOCKS
N° NAME OF THE
FARM/PLANT
ATION
LOCATION FORMER
OWNER
NEW OWNER TITLE TOT.
ARE
A
S
M
V
LUBERO TERRITORY Farms and plantations
1 KANIERE KANIERE CNKI Kambale Katimba 360 80
2
LWANGONGO Parc
n°17 KAYNA CNKI Karushya 100 100
3 LWANGONGO Parc n°15 KAYNA CNKI Karushya 102 102
4
LWANGONGO Parc
n°9 KAYNA CNKI Semakuba 100 70
5
LWANGONGO Parc
n°19 KAYNA CNKI
Kahambu
Kiluhu 100 90
6
LWANGONGO Parc
n°20 KAYNA CNKI
Kambale
Katehi 100 100
7
LWANGONGO Parc
n°16 KAYNA CNKI
Kambale
Muhindo 100 100
8
LWANGONGO Parc
n°21 KAYNA CNKI
Paluku
Kabunga 105 105
9
LWANGONGO Parc
n°18 KAYNA CNKI
Paluku
Kabunga 139 139
10 KAHOHA KAHOHA CNKI
Kambale
Kihuhani 50 50
11
LWANGONGO Parc
n°4 KAYNA CNKI
Muhindo
Kyavakama 100 100
12. Komba Komba CNKI Pères
assomptionniste
10 10
13. Mahamba Q.Mahamba CNKI Pères
assomptionniste
23 23
14. Vutala Malende CNKI Diocèse de
Butembo-Beni
180 180
15. ITAV Vutsundo CNKI Diocèse de
Butembo-Beni
164 164
16. CEBCE Malende CNKI CEBCE 26 26
17. Bel air Cité de Butembo Ville de
Butembo
22ha 22
18. Hôpital de Katwa katwa CNKI CBACA 8ha 8
19. UCG
Vutatimbwa CNKI Diocèse de
Butembo-Beni
340ha 340
20. Kambali BUTEMBO CNKI Pères
assomptionniste
s
5ha à 5
35 | P a g e
21. Léproserie Katwa CNKI CBCA 23ha 23
22. kirimavolo Katwa CNKI CBCA 9ha 9
23. Nzoli Kimbesa Mutanga CNKI NZOLI
KIMBESA
196ha 196
24. Paluku Lolwako kangote/Musit CNKI PALOS 13ha 13
25. Srs oblates de
l’assomption
Passionnat CNKI Srs OBLATES 13ha 13
26. Kambale Kiputsu Kipese CNKI KIPUTSU 114ha 114
27. Paluku Lolwako Masereka CNKI PALOS 177ha 177
28. Paluku Mbumba Bukenye CNKI MBUMBA 51ha 51
29. Vighole Kavanda CNKI Tabu Bin
Witende
36ha 36
30. Kambale Katimba kimbulu CNKI KATIMBA 65ha 60
31 MBANGA kimbulu CNKI Kambale
Mbanga
70ha 70
32. Bloc Biena
Masumko CNKI N.R. 95h N.R
33. Bloc Luhahi kimbulu CNKI N.R. 130ha N.R
34. Bloc Mutoto Lubero CNKI N.R. 170ha 120
35. Bloc kamaheri Kimbulu CNKI N.R. 85ha N.R
36. Bloc Lutembe Vusamba/
Lutembe
CNKI N.R. 45ha N.R
37. Bloc Ngora Vsamba/Ngoro CNKI N.R. 75ha N.R
38. Bloc Kibirakoko vusamba vers
kasinga
CNKI N.R. 90ha 35
39. Bloc kavare.. N.R. CNKI N.R. 60ha N.R
40. Bloc lubughe
N.R. CNKI N.R. 175ha N.R
41. Bloc kaniangoko N.R. CNKI N.R. 95ha 46
42. Bloc Bisaravwe Visaravwe CNKI N.R. 60ha 56
43. Bloc kifuko cité Bapere CNKI N.R. 493ha N.R
44. Bloc Nya-nya Bapere CNKI N.R. 466ha N.R
45. Bloc Kambala
Bapere CNKI N.R. 473ha N.R
46. Bloc Mupanda Bapere CNKI N.R. 490ha N.R
47. Bloc Mandjinga Bapere CNKI N.R. 437ha N.R
36 | P a g e
48. Bloc Masisi Bapere CNKI N.R. 457ha N.R
49. Bloc Lendopolitiki Bapere CNKI N.R. 438ha N.R
50. Bloc Malunguna Bapere CNKI N.R. 403ha N.R
51. Bloc Kifuko Bapere CNKI N.R. 459ha N.R
52. Bloc Lonia Bapere CNKI N.R. 424 ha N.R
53. Bloc Kariere bapere CNKI N.R. 365ha N.R
54. Bloc Matadi Bapere CNKI N.R. 393ha N.R
55. Bloc Miere. Bapere CNKI N.R. 85ha N.R
56. Bloc Mamboa à à
Lubero
Wasa Mamboa CNKI N.R. 132ha N.R
57. Bloc colonial Mususa de
kirimba Bukenie)
CNKI Michels Ernest 22ha N.R
58. Bloc de colonisation Musasa Lubero CNKI N.R. 22ha N.R
59. Bloc vuhumbi
Butembo buyora CNKI N.R. 22ha N.R
60. LUHAHI II LUHAHI CNKI
Mkambale
Wasim 50 50
TOTAL CNKI BLOCK in LUBERO TERRITORY 9472 1193
BENI TERRITORY PLANTATIONS
61. KONGOLI KIMA KONGOLI KIMA CNKI block Mumbere Ndianabo 272
62. MANZAMUNDO MANZAMUNDO CNKI block Van Hoof Louis 84 84
63. KIBWE MADIWE CNKI block Van Hoof Louis 100 100 64. ALOYA MADIWE CNKI block Van Hoof Louis 90 90 65. MAMBENA MAMBENA CNKI block Kasereka Kasi 400 400
66. MANZAMUNDO MANZAMUNDO CNKI block Katembo Vuma 100 100
67. MALONDO MALONDO CNKI block Kayembe Manda 50 50
68. TABI TABI CNKI block Millor Roger 131 131
69. TABI TABI CNKI block Millor Roger 80 80
70. TABI TABI CNKI block Millor Roger 98 98
71. TABI TABI CNKI block Millor Roger 78
72. LUHULE MADIWE CNKI block Pick Bing Marc 125 73. LUHULE MADIWE CNKI block Pick Bing Marc 114 114 74. LUHULE MADIWE CNKI block Pick Bing Marc 100 100 75. TOTAL AREA FOR CNKI PLANTATIONS IN BENI TERRITORY 1822
FARMS 76. KASAMBIRI KASAMBIRI CNKI block Musungo 212 212
77. BIAKOBE BIAKOBE CNKI block Mwenge Katungo 155,91
155,
9
TOTAL AREA OF FARMS IN BENI TERRITORY 367,91
RUTSHURU TERRITORY PLANTATIONS
78. KIBUTUTU gpt Bukoma CNKI block Ruz Mr Remis 80
� We did not find a farm which belonged to CNKI block
MASISI TERRITORY
PLANTATIONS 79 KIPFUMU Kipfumu CNKI block Bakungu Mayao 112
80 KIPFUMU Kipfumu CNKI block Bakungu Kalwy 112
81 NYANGE Nyange CNKI block Muhima 120
82 NGEREKO Ngereko CNKI block Baramisi
37 | P a g e
83 KIPFUMU Kipfumu CNKI block Population 120
TOTAL PLANTATIONS AREA IN MASISI 464
FARMS 84 MUFA MUFA CNKI BLOCK Ndakola 108 108
85 KABATI KISUMA KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Bizima Kara 81 81
86 KABATI KISUMA
KABATI
KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Bizima Kara 53 53
87 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE CNKI BLOCK Makabuza 129
88 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Tukabintabu 120
89 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Kakwene 120
90 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Kasoza 98
91 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Tukabintabu 95 95 92 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK 16,1 16,1 93 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Tukabintabu 34 34 94 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Tukabintabu 25 25
95 KABATI
KABATI
KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Safi 127 127
96 KABATI KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Makabuza 128 128
97 KABATI
KABATI
KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Makabuza 96 96
98 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE CNKI BLOCK Muhutu 30,7 30,7
99 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE CNKI BLOCK Naguru 50 50
1O0 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Serushago 62 62 101 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Mishiki 65 65
102 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Kashani 180
103 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Gakwene 55
104 NYABIONDO NYABIONDO CNKI BLOCK Shamamba 29
105 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE CNKI BLOCK Kamudoga 50 106 MURAMBI MURAMBI CNKI BLOCK Néo Apostolique 117
107 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE CNKI BLOCK Ritaganirwa 38 108 TSIRU MUFA TSIRU MUFA CNKI BLOCK Ndaalitsa 195
109 MURAMBI MURAMBI CNKI BLOCK Néo Apostolique 92
110 KAHASHA KAHASHA CNKI BLOCK Mutaka 222
111 KAHASHA KAHASHA CNKI BLOCK Mutaka 118
112 KAHASHA KAHASHA CNKI BLOCK Ndakola 111
113 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Bizima Karaha 148
114 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Kalinda 100
115 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Kalinda 50
116 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Kalinda
117 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Kalinda
118 TSHANGULUBE TSHANGULUBE CNKI BLOCK Ntakaziharo 39,5 119 KIFUMWE KIFUMWE CNKI BLOCK Ntakaziharo 31
120 MUHANGA MUHANGA CNKI BLOCK Ndakola 150
121 RUSIKA RUSIKA CNKI BLOCK Karuganda 80 80
122 LUSHEBERE LUSHEBERE CNKI BLOCK Ndakadayu 60 60
123 KIKOMA KIKOMA CNKI BLOCK Mulengezi 147
124 CHUNGO BLOC CHUNGO BLOC CNKI BLOCK Nkizingike 40
125 MUSHWA MUSHWA CNKI BLOCK Ruhinya 112 112
126 MUSHWA MUSHWA CNKI BLOCK Miburo 118 118
127 KABATI
KABATI
KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Miburo 98 98
128 KABATI KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Balinda 200 200
129 KABATI
KABATI
KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Kabanda 130 130
130 NYARUNABA NYARUNABA CNKI BLOCK Nguringoma 171,5 100
131 KABATI KABATI CNKI BLOCK Gasasita 400 370
132 KAHASHA KAHASHA CNKI BLOCK Ndakola 112
133 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Mbua 24
134 MUKOHWA MUKOHWA CNKI BLOCK Mastaki 50
135 LULAMBO LULAMBO CNKI BLOCK Karunganda 170
136 RUSIKA RUSIKA CNKI BLOCK Kaboyi 30
137 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Kaurwa 32
138 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Kinyakura 174
139 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Malira 64
140 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Muhima
38 | P a g e
141 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Serenge 22
142 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Population 112
143 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Kasoza 98
144 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Tukabintabu 95
145 KABATI KISUMA CNKI BLOCK Tukabintabu 16,1
146 MBIZI MBIZI CNKI BLOCK Nguba 14
TOTAL FARM AREA 5476
TOTAL AREA OF CNKI BLOCK LAND GRABBED 17735
� CNKI blocks of MASISI territory were in quasi totalilty grabbed by individuals and at
the expense of traditional chiefs and local people. This behavior of land actors is
explained by several researchers, as the fact that people taken as workforce would
rather free themselves from the customary system of land management. In fact, so as
not to continually depend on moods, tantrums and uncertainties of traditional leaders,
actors prefer to seek land directly land from land administration. More still, the
indigenous people are never in a hurry, at least in the last ten decades, to grant land
use rights to those they call the intruders. Cfr MUGANGU .S.op cit.
� On the other hand, the quasi totality, the CNKI blocks of Lubero territory in Bapere
community, are neither informed nor operated on at least for the moment. This is due
to the fact that the region has for a long time been isolated and since the departure of
the settlers very few players/actors are really interested in this sector Bapere, which is
also the largest in the territory of Lubero and having an area on its own of (8872km2),
almost double the Masisi territory (4734) and slightly larger than the territory of Beni
(7484). Bapere is the least populated in the territory and the second just after
WALIKALE across the province in terms of low population density.
The insecurity that has prevailed for long time in this forest region, the militias that are
fighting the mining sectors, are the reason behind the land actors not being truly interested to
grab land in these blocks and land that is generally not inhabited.
The blocks of this region were famous for their mineral production.
With the gradual establishment of peace in the region, it is feared that the miners of any kind
can not rush to this "jungle" if appropriate measures are not taken to protect the indigenous
people and conserve the ecosystem that the pygmies know how to safeguard to date.
The negotiations that are ongoing between the Congolese government and the French
company BOLORE to exploit these mineral regions are to be considered in the perspective of
future land expropriation at the expense of local people.
Our face to face meetings in PARIS with representatives of that big French company
BOLORE have not produced results to verify this information and unfortunately the day’s
government does not want to publish the contracts under negotiation or already signed
contracts.
In the same geographical light, in the territory of Beni, the collective sector of Beni-Mbau, in
the BABILA-BAKAIKU locality, the company « CHRISTIAN LIFE WORLD MISSION
FRONTIER » has just acquired a big transfer of about 1440 ha, after a lot of negotiations and
complications from the political elite from the area. Despite the major sensitization of the
customary chiefs by the civil society organizations and the opposition of some independent
technicians for the purchase or say the sale of land by customary chiefs, they gave in to the
temptation of money given to them.
The civil society organizations, who were not opposed at all to the establishing of this
American company through its Korean branch, proposed that indeginous land must be
considered as their capital contribution in the company and would therefore become also
shareholders of the company.
Les responsables de cette société n’ont pas du tout accepté cette formule d’exploitation.
39 | P a g e
THE PROBLEM OF CREATING PARKS IN THE NORTH KIVU PROVINCE.
The creation of parks in North Kivu province, in as much as it seemed not to have immediate
visible consequences on the availability of land has become later on one of the causes of land
conflicts in North Kivu, putting into consideration the area they occupy and the increasing
population pressure in the region.
Two parks were created in the province in 1925, for the VIRUNGA Park and in 1947 for the
MAIKO Park respectively.
The following table presents per territory the areas occupied by the parks.
Table n° _____. Area of parks per territory in North Kivu province.
N° Territory Total
area (Km2)
Park area % Observations
VIRUNGA MAIKO
1. Rutshuru 5289 2846 0 53
2. Masisi 4.744 362 0 7
3. Walikale 23475
4. Nyiragongo 333 170 0 51
5. Lubero 18096
6. Beni 7484 3300
TOTAL
AREA
59.631 7900
Take note right away that these park areas are sometimes challenged by the parties for the
people living along the river and the Congolese Institute for Conservation
of Nature, ICCN, and the organization that manages parks in the DRC. However, these
figures are relatively close to reality. We have several sources that give different
figures especially in terms of Rutshuru territory.
As can be seen, the creation of parks also subtracted from the arable land of local
communities, a large area that these communities continue to claim rightly or wrongly.
As highlighted, Professor MUGANGU MATABARO "The creation of Virunga National
Park had the effect over the same period not only of reducing the available land but also of
displacing communities or parts of communities, placing them under the political and land
dependence situation of the host communities "MUGANGU MATABARO S. The land
crisis in eastern DRC; the African Great Lakes. 2007.2008 Directory, P.30.
V. WAVE OF CREATION OF RESERVES AND TOWNS FROM LARGER CITIES OR TOWN ARES.
Community Reserves: For many reasons and motivation various civil society actors
and traditional leaders create in an accelerated manner forest reserves: Sometimes referred to
as "protected area, sometimes community reserves," and this is a way of depriving the
indigenous people cultivable land.
A last attempt has been made by the provincial government to create new cities given
their high concentration of people. A total of 17 new cities with about 1500 ha escape the
customary management of land.
The fierce opposition of traditional leaders against the project pushed this power to back
down. But this is only a postponement. Rapid urbanization is the basis of the subtraction of
land available for local communities and traditional leaders.
The following table identifies the reserves and their respective areas in different territories of
the province:
40 | P a g e
Table n°_____ Reserves and proctected areas in North Kivu province.
N° TERRITORY PROTECTED AREA OR
RESERVE
AREA OBSERVATIONS
1. Rutshuru 1.
2.
2. Masisi
3. Walikale
4. Nyiragongo 1. KIBUMBA : 1
2. BUHUMBA : 2
3. MUDJA : 1
4. KIBATI : 1
5. Lubero 1. TAYNA
2. KYAVIRIMU
3.
6. Beni 1.
2.
3.
TOTAL AREA
VI. BIG TRANSACTIONS IN THE LAST TEN YEARS.
In this section we raise in particular the following points which were the subject of our
investigations in the territories doing these investigations was possible:
It should be noted that due to several factors including primarily insecurity, there have not
been several cases of land grabbing by trans national organisations/companies. Indeed, they
are not always in a hurry to invest in areas of insecurity such as eastern DRC
However, a phenomenon has been observed since the country is experiencing some sort of
peace. Local political actors are particularly interested in land for several reasons including:
1. Investing in land as a safe haven. Indeed, with continuing insecurity, the traditional
business as is done in region that is to say "buying and selling" of goods imported as
local sales, has high risk of looting.
2. Anticipation on the phenomenon "cargoode Map." Since the international community
speaks a lot about cargoode, some players have expectation of a future market thus
buying large land from the traditional leaders.
3. Some foreign companies have also gotten large-scale acquisitions in anticipation of
major agricultural, pastoral and mining activities.
4. Some took advantage of the various consecutive regimes in managing the province in
order to own parcels of land in full contempt of the law.
Unfortunately several factors did not allow us to fully comprehend this phenomenon.
- 1. Our study, being very limited in terms of means and time, encountered socio-political,
cultural and security obstacles.
41 | P a g e
- 2. Strategies to cover all operation transactions of selling and buying of land by various
parties. Vendors generally, traditional leaders, do not want small-scale farmers to know that
their land was sold by their leaders to third parties. The buyers in turn, do not want these
operations are known so as to avoid both tax and reaction from framers whose land they paid
for.
- 3. The pressure from the union and human rights organizations defending human rights that
interfere with the actions of these as relates to the sale of land owned and operated by local
communities.
- 4. Armed groups and militias also spearhead the ‘fight’ against land grabbing of ‘ancestral
land’, by other parties at times by strangers with unknown motives.
For all these reasons, there are certainly many cases of land transactions which took place but
remain unknown by the administration and worse still by the people.
The study had responses and testimonies with respect to the following cases as having been
subject to heavy land negotiations between several actors:
42 | P a g e
Table n°____Table of some cases that were subject of land transactions in North Kivu
province from 2000 to 2010.
1. Masisi territory
43 | P a g e
FARM OR
PASTURELAND
OWNER PLACE AREA TITLE AND
DURATION
01. BUBOGO Farm KAKIRA-
LEONIDAS
BUBOGO 120ha Permanent
02. ISSA-BALUME Farm BALUME BUBOGO 50ha 25years
03. LUHONGA Farm SANDRO LUHONGA 352 Permanent
04. NDALAGA Farm COCOBU BUTARE
300ha
25years
05. NKIRANGANWA
Farm
COCOBU BUTARE 25years
06. RUJUGIRO Farm RUJUGIRO KILORIRWE 150ha 25years
07. KARAHA Farm KARAHA KILORIRWE 60ha 25years
08. MAJORO Farm MAJORO KILORIRWE 25years
09. MADAME MERLO
Farms (all)
MADAME
MERLO
- KILORIRWE
- BIBATAMA
- TEBERO
3.000ha 25years
10. KAVEDO Farm KAVEDO KILORIRWE 150ha 25years
11. RUGABA Farm RUGABA KILORIRWE 25years
12. Goma diocese (all its
farms and pastureland
(parishes)
DIOCESE - 2049 25years
13. KIRIVITA Farm KIRIVITA NYABURA 260ha 25years
14. TEBERO Farm SEMANA TEBERO 60ha 25years
15. BAHATI Farm BAHATI TEBERO 25years
16. KABATI Farm MUNYARUGER
ERO
KABATI 25years
17. AMANI school LYCEE AMANI KABATI 25years
18. MUGUGU block - MWESO 25years
19. BAHANI Farm BAHANI ROJEBESHI 25years
20. HERMAN Farm HERMAN BISEMBE 25years
21. RUHANA MIRI NDI
Farm
RUHANAMIRE BURUNGU 62ha 25years
22. KAMANZI Farm KAMANZI SAKE 25years
23. ZIMULINDA Farm VINCENT
ZIMUEL
RUBAYA 25years
24. INNOCENT Farm GAHIZI
INNOCENT
RUBAYA 25years
44 | P a g e
25. OSSO Farm BISENGIMANA OSSO 2.004ha 25years
26. NDAKOLA Farm NDAKOLA KATALE 1003 ha 25years
27. LOSHI Farm NGIRABATWA
RE
LUASHI 370 ha 25years
28. RWABAHENDA Farm RWABAHEND
A
BURAMO 250ha 25years
29. BITEGETSIMANA
Farm
BITEGETSIMA
NA
BURAMO 210ha 25years
30. RIGO Farm RIGO KISUMA N.R. 25years
31. SANGIRA Farm SANGIRA RUVUNDA N.R 25years
32. RWAGATI Farm RWAGATI RUVUNDA 105ha 25years
33. SAFI Farm SAFI ADILI NGUNGU N.R 25years
34. KASUKU Farms (All) KASUKU NGUNGU-
NYABURA
1.850ha 25years
35. GAHAMANYI Farm GAHAMANYI BURUNGU 55ha 25years
36. NDAYAMBAJE Farm NDAYAMBAJE NGUNGU 60ha 25years
37. MWINYANTORE
Farm
RUTWE KIBABI N.R. 25years
38. LUANDA Farm FRANCOIS
LUANDA
KIBABI N.R 25years
39. SENINGA Farm SENINGA KIBABI N.R 25years
40. OSWALD Farm MUKINGI KIBABI 155ha 25years
41. SERUFULI Farm SERUFILI KIRONKO N.R 25years
42. MOINES DE
MOKOTOS
MOINES MOKOTO 300ha 25years
43. KALINDA Farm FAMILLE
KALINDA
BWEREMAN
A
N.R 25years
44. Farm KIBIRA KIBIRA –
THOMAS
LUSHANGI 65ha 25years
45. LUSHANGI Farm KARGO-
TWAGIRA
LUSHANGI N.R 25years
46. RUJUGIRO Farm RUJUGIRO KITCHANGA 250ha 25years
47. MADAME SENATA
Farm
SENATA MUSHAKI 60ha 25years
48. HESHIMA Farm HESHIMA MUSHAKI N.R 25years
49. DUNIA Farm DUNIA MUSHAKI 122ha 25years
45 | P a g e
50. RWUBAKA Farm RWUBAKA KATOYI 200ha 25years
51. HACERI Farm HACERI KATOYI 104ha 25years
52. BIGEMBE Farm BIGEMBE KATOYI N.R 25years
53. ZIMULINDA Farm ZIMULINDA
ANTHER
KATOYI N.R 25years
54. RUKAMATA Farm RUKAMATA KATOYI 305 ha 25years
55. MUPOROSO Farm MUPOROSO KATOYI 283ha 25years
56. SEREME Farm SEREME KAUSA 150ha 25years
57. KANYOVE Farm FAMILLE
KANYOVE
KAUSA 120ha 25years
58. UWIMANA Farm UWIMANA MAHANGA 205ha 25years
59. NGULU Farm - KIZIMBA N.R 25years
60. MUUNABANDI block - KIZIMBA N.R 25years
TOTAL ESTIMATES FOR MASISI 14839 ie
approxima
tely
15000ha.
Source: In charge of the MASISI land registry and 1 member of FEC.
2. RUTSHURU TERRITORY
46 | P a g e
Table n° ___ Listed cases in Rutshuru territory N° Name of
the expl
Proprietor/Nationality Area Location or map Intended
goals
Consultation
undertakent
with other
actors
1 Domaine de
KATALE
MICHEL Baudouin/
Belge
4326 ha BIRUMA,
KATAKE, and
NYONGERA
-Production
and
marketing of
good quality
coffee
-Coffee
exportation
for industry
-agricultural
research for
introduction
of new seed
variety
-Contract with
the congo
government
- Use of local
labour/workforce
2 Jardin
teaicole de
Ngeri
(GTN)
BUCQUEY
ACHIEL/Portu
gais
2007 ha BUKOMBO/Bwito
chieftancy
Production
and
marketing of
tea
Idem
3 Bertolé BERTOLE
GERORGES/
Polonais
200 ha KISHARU area Production
and
marketing of
palm oil
Idem
4 Mangat MANGAT/
Indienne
250 ha KISHARU area Production
and
exportation
of palm oil
Idem
5 Liwali LIWALIWA/
belge
100 ha KAHUNGA Coffee
marketing
Idem
47 | P a g e
-awareness
creation on
coffee
production
TOTAL IN RUTSHURU 6883
48 | P a g e
The cases noted in Rutshuru territory are not in themselves cases whose transactions were
done in the last ten years. But given their extent or scope in the region, the populations think
that they are recent cases which have had alot of consequences/effects on life and land
security of the local communities.
KATALE is the most talked about in the whole of Rutshuru territory.
Table n°____ Cases identified in Butembo and Kayna.
No Concessionnaires Area Geographic
situation
Take over
date
1 KATINA MBAYAHI 4ha Witere in Lubero
territory
01/04/2008
2 KATEMBO
MUTSUVA ABEL
3ha Ndando 01/03/2008
3 CODEKI 14ha Kavali
Musienene
11/01/2008
4 KATEMBO
KATALIVWA Daniel
7ha Masuli 29/09/2007
5 MBUSA KAYUMBU 6ha Vuliki 11/09/2007
6 KISONI KAMBALE
Sem
29ha Lubero 01/09/2006
7 MBOKANI KASAYI 23ha Lubero 1/10/2006
8 Compagnie de Marie
notre dame
94ha Lubero 01/07/2003
9 MASTAKI
KALAMBIRE
65ha Kivira Butembo 02/08/2007
10 MAUNGA KIMBUTE 12ha Katolo
Musienene
01/07/2007
11 MAUNGA BATEMA 17ha Musienene 01/07/2007
13 KATSONGO
MUKONDA
16ha Kasitu-Kinane 01/09/2006
14 PALUKU
MUHONGYA
7ha Mwenga-
Kasinga
01/09/2006
15 KATSONGO
MUKONDA
18ha Isale 01/08/2006
16 KAMBALE VISO 133ha Lubero territory 14/06/2002
17 MUMBERE MUHESI
TELESPHORE
26ha Ngombe
vwandaghala
01/07/2003
18 KASEREKA
KATEMBO
90ha Mwenye Masehe 01/10/2003
19 KAMBALE
VIKALWE
33ha Lubero area 01/05/2001
20 KATEMBO
KAHEHERO
148ha mukonze 01/08/2001
21 KATEMBO
KAHEHERO
17ha Vukenge II 01/08/2001
22 KATEMBO
KAHEHERO
85ha Lubero territory 01/08/2001
23 KATEMBO
KAHEHERO
87ha Lubero territory 01/08/2001
24 KATEMBO
KAHEHERO
886ha Lubero territory 01/08/2001
49 | P a g e
25 MASIKA KAVALAMI 56ha Lubero territory 01/08/2001
26 KAMBALE
SIRHAKYAVHU
204ha Lubero area 01/02/2004
27 KATEMBO
SYASIMWA
156ha Musingi-Lwero 01/02/2004
28 NDUNGO
MANZEKELE
46ha Luongo 01/08/2003
29 KAHINDO
WASUKUNDI
60ha Kyangwali
Lubero
Mwenye Lubero
01/07/2003
30 Communauté baptiste
au centre de l’Afrique
CBCA
Katwa 01/02/2003
31 ISENGINGO
KAMBERE NGISE
84ha Biena Lubero 03/10/2005
32 KAKULE SIRIWAYO 34ha Munoli chefferie
de baswagha
01/7/2005
33 Famille NZOLI
KIMBESA
196ha Mutanga Lubero 09/05/2005
34 KATSUVA
MUGHANDA
21ha lubero 15/04/2005
35 Université adventiste de
Lukanga
39ha Lukanga Lubero 15/06/2005
36 MWAHULWA
KILIBA DAVID
150ha Luofu Lubero 17/06/2004
37 SIVIKWA
MWENGESYALI
94ha Q.Matembe, cel
Vusesa Butembo
01/05/2004
38 MUHINDO KOMBI 19ha - Luumishwa
Bbo town
10/05/2000
39 Communauté baptiste
au centre de l’Afrique
CBCA
10ha Institut
biblique de
Katwa
Katwa vutamirie 01/12/2000
40 KATEMBO KISOLU 45ha Kasugho Lubero territory 01/11/2003
41 KAMBALE
MUKEMBA
10ha - Lubero kavale
Kyabwe
01/03/2000
42 KATEMBO BANGA 103ha - Kirunggwe/Musindi 01/10/2002
43 MUHINDO
VANGANAYIRIRE
DAMIEN
10ha Mighobwe Mighobwe factory 01/11/2002
44 Diocèse de Butembo-
Beni
38ha Bbo Molongo hill 01/10/2002
45 KAMBALE
MAKAKALO
44ha - Mulongo/Kiragho 01/10/2002
46 KATEMBO
MBANGA
247ha - Kirungwe 01/08/2002
47 KAMBALE
NDAGHALA
164ha Lubero Kyavirimu /Lutambi 01/09/2000
48 Mission évangélique
des adventistes du 7e
jour
43ha Lubero Kyavirimu /Lutambi 01/09/2000
49 KATSONGO
MUKONDA
136ha - Mutundu 01/05/2000
50 SIVIKA
MWENGESYALI
45ha - Vusala Busesa 01/05/2000
50 | P a g e
51 KAMBERE
KIPUTSU
66ha - Bwambe-Busengwa 09/01/2001
52 KAMBALE
SAASITA
63ha BP313 Bbo Batangi 12/04/2000
53 Diocese de butembo-
Beni
68ha BP179Bbo Itundi-
Biongwe
12/04/2000
54 KATEMBO
KISOLU
45ha
kasugho Lubero territory 01/11/2003
TOTAL LAND IN
BUTEMBO AND
KAYNA
4120
Some comments:
For the areas cited above, we found out that an area of about 26000 ha was subject of
transaction. Once again, the territory of MASISI is leading with more than half of land sold,
registered and regularized of 15000 ha.
We must establish the correlation between the good representation of this territory in the
different different successive rebellions in the North province and the willingness to grab land
while taking advantage of all situations which are presents in order to reinforce land security
when they are in power.
If this correlation is established, we can very easily affirm that the land conflicts are also
among the causes of persistent wars and land insecurity in the North Kivu province.
Several people met during our investigations only wished that the transactions that have taken
place during the war period must be revisited given the circumstances in which they took
place.
51 | P a g e
VII. MOTIVATIONS OF ACTORS INVOLVED IN LAND GRABBING.
The actors have different and diversified motivating factors behind land grabbing. The following table recapitulates these different motivations
by actors.
TABLE N°______ : SUMMARY OF MOTIVATION ELEMENTS OF DIFFERENT ACTORS INVOLVED IN THE PROCESS OF
LAND GRABBING.
N° ACTORS MOTIVATIONS IMPLICATIONS ON LOCAL
COMMUNITIES
OBSERVATIONS.
POSITIVE NEGATIVE
1. The
government
(National and
provincial)
- Attract foreign investers
for capital fees/income.
- Make profitable land
poorly exploited.
- Expropriation of
local populations.
- Emergence of landless communities in certain
districts (Masisi and Rutshuru).
- Increase in number of armed groups and militias
for selfdefence.
- Create employment for
the population.
- A non qualified,
poorly remunerated
workforc by some big
entrepreneurs who
continue to exploit land
despite the crisis and
insecurity.
- Poor
proletarianization
of the population.
Rusthuru case.
- Its only the processing factories that employ
some workers.
- Agricultural entreprises prefer haveing exploiting
their transfers through local populations
sometimes on payment of some royalty or by
working at the same time on their perenial crops
destined for exportation.
- Give value to natural
resources which are
insufficient and not
exploited
- Development of local
community land
- Selling and
speculation around rural
land (More negative
than positive)
-Making poor
local
communities.
- Progressive
acquisition of land
by a certain
category (elites,
politicians and
intellectuals) and
- The poor farmers are tempted by money and
from the pressure of needs they are sometimes
forcedto sell their land for those without other
sources of income.
52 | P a g e
foreign
enterprises.
2. Foreign
enterprises
- Access cheap land.
- Expropriation of
land.
- Weak capacities of receiving countries to
valuably negotiate with the foreing entreprises.
- Take advantage of the
facilities offered by the
receiving country
(taxation, procedures and
judicial security…)
- Cration of a workforce
classe poorly paid anda
t the mercy of the
enterprises;
- The unionization is very weak and chronique
joblessness weakens the employees from any
claim. See reserves on job market.
- Invest in a
promising/rich sector
- Accumulation of
unexploited land
belonging to
farmers.
- These factors well marked in Rutshuru territy
and a part of Beni terrirory.
- Produce with minimum
cost for exportation
- Sometimes the
opening up of areas,
acces to basic social
infrastructure : health
centres, schools …
- Food insecurity
since the
production is
mainly for
exportation coffee,
papaine, cocoa,
quinquina, palm
oil…
Very few are in the food crop production and they
insufficiently produce them alongside the export
crops.
Unfulfiled promises by the entrepreneurs.
3. Acquirers - Invest in a promising
sector
- Constitution of land
reserves in certain
areas.
- Accumulation of
unexploited land
alongside farmer
land.
- Difficult acces to
land by local
communities.
- Acquisitions sometimes fraudulently of land
while manipulating law especiallcy around the
settler transfers and the CNKI transfer.
- Local culture of
presitge investment
especially on extensive
land for livestock rearing.
- Taking away of
large tracts of
arable land from
local populations.
- Poor exploitation or lack of exploitation of good
land at the expense of the local communitites.
53 | P a g e
4. Local elites - Valeur réfuge - Accumulation of
insufficient and
unexploited land
- Strong commercialization of land excludes the
vulnerabe and the poor in the competition.
- Anticiper sur un marché
porteur biocarburant,
carte de cargoodne
- Difficult acces to
land by the
vulnerable
populations and
driving them
away.
Potential risks in reoccurence of conflicts
emanating from the ever growing market for land
and renegotiating sale contracts by the future
generations of the present sellers, from where we
have resurgence of conflicts. Case of MASISI and
LUBERO.
5. Traditional
leaders/custom
ary chiefs ;
- The taste of luxury and
easy way of becoming
rich.
- Expropriation of
land sometimes
exploited by the
small-scale
farmers.
- The functionning, lack of accessibility and
complexity of the congolese judicial system offers
vey little opportunities for reclamation for farmers.
- Sometimes getting rid
of land under conflict.
- Expropriation of
farmers’ land.
- Big entrepreneurs lust for land in conflict since
they are very cheap.
- Sometimes the administration and judicial
officers amplify conflcts since they are the first
beneficiairis in cases of land conflicts.
- Customary power made
fragile
- In certain cases, the
emancipation of
populations under the
customary judgements.
-Suspicion vis-à-
vis customary
power.
- Tendency of going back to the administration
despite its weaknesses especially those who have
money to pay for the services.
54 | P a g e
VIII. LAND LEGISLATION IN THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO AND
ITS IMPLICATIONS ON FARMER LAND IN NORTH KIVU PROVINCE.
In this section, we are not presenting the shortcomings of the land law but rather to
highlighting its limits in order to consider the priority actions and strategies for the managers
and leaders of EAFF as well as of other actors involved in land.
There already exists abundant literature on this theme. We will limit ourselves here to the
salient aspects and try to complement these elements with new elements that should be noted
with the adoption by the Congolese National Assembly on land in the "Law on the Basic
Principles of agriculture" in this month of May 2011.
We note immediately that this law will wait until its promulgation by the President of the
Republic and will only take effect six months after its promulgation, refer to article 86 of the
said law.
We thought worthwhile to make reference to a study we conducted in the month July 2009 in
the activity building program FAT, a study undertaken in collaboration with GRET, Group
for Research and Technological Exchange, the Forum of Friends of FAT Earth and the CCFD
Catholic Committee against Hunger and for Development.
Being in the coordinating team of this study, it allows us to take the elements identified by it
to this point.
These elements are still relevant in the extent that we do not have any more that is recent that
would contradict them. However, we felt as mentioned above that we should integrate the
new agricultural law which has just been adopted.
We will also make reference to the code of good conduct of chiefs which is being debated in
the provincial assembly in North Kivu, even if it is not yet adopted by the provincial
legislature. It has already passed the debate, what remains is the adoption article by article
before being passed and promulgated by the provincial governor.
The analysis of land management system will enable us to identify the various obstacles
encountered by the small-scale producer against other players land. It may also identify gaps
and elements that facilitate land ownership phenomenon and massive concentration of land by
large-scale farmers at the expense of small-scale farmers in North Kivu province.
VIII.1. The position of two land management systems
1.1. Complex and unenforced laws
Land legislation, despite the promulgation of the various sections, has changed little since the
last thirty (30) years.
55 | P a g e
It currently represents a bottleneck on the one hand to the resolution and conflict prevention
and on the other hand to the development of the country.
The historical development of land legislation/law
Land legislation of the DRC has been defined by a series of successive pieces of legislation;
the most critical are those of 1966, 1971, 1973, 1980. They highly affirmed the property
ownership of the state lands, while ensuring the security of property rights assigned to
persons (physically or morally) in the form of concessions, more or less durable or even
perpetual.1 »
- The colonial period and private ownership
Before independence, the colonial state had all rights on "Belgian Congo" land and the
issue of land and property is governed by the provisions of Book II of the Belgian
Civil Code which enshrines in particular the private ownership of land.
Two orders (from 30 September 1922 and May 31, 1934) establish the procedure to be
followed before any disposal (transfer act involving the property2) or lease of land
(transfer act involving the right of use). These two ways of access to property was
carried on public lands and were granted according to the districts and the size of
funds involved or by the King of Belgium or by provincial governors, or by custodian
of title deeds.
The procedure was "to find vacant land required for transfer or lease and the nature
and extent of rights that the local community could have on these lands." From the
onset until its conclusion, this study involved the political, administrative customary
and legal authorities. So there was at that time legal measures which would be used to
enforce occupancy rights of "indigenous people" and to organize a system of
ownership in their favour. However, although this was supposed to protect the rights
of the population this was rarely respected.
« Thus, for the lands under their management, administrative authorities were issuing
various titles either to have right of property for funds or building or to prove the
transfer of use of such property. Among these titles, there were certificates of
registration and landlord’s book. In addition, it was possible to obtain on the land
occupied by local communities use rights from the leaders of these communities, and
that, following a contract of sale for a consideration or for free» 3.
In Kivu, we have seen this in a previous chapter; the monopoly of land management is
assigned to the National Committee of Kivu (CNKI). And therefore during
independence, four types of land were recognized:
o « 1 ° indigenous lands governed by customs and local practices;
o 2 ° registered land governed by Book II of the Belgian Civil Code;
o 3 ° lands occupied in native towns and non-traditional centres governed by
local administrative law;
o 4 ° vacant land 4. »
- Post-colonial period
1 MATHIEU P., MAFIKIRI TSONGO A., op. cit.
2 MALERE MUDEKEREZA, G., La problématique de la survivance des anciens titres de propriété foncière et
immobilière en droit congolais, RCN Justice et démocratie Bulletin n ° 27 Premier trimestre 2009, Droit Foncier 3 BUCYALIMWE MARARO, S., Pouvoirs, élevage bovin et la question foncière au Nord-Kivu, Anvers, 2001, p.31
4 PALUKU KITAKYA, A. Interactions entre la gestion foncière et l’économie locale en région de Butembo, Nord-
Kivu, République Démocratique du Congo, Thèse de doctorat, Louvain-la-Neuve, 2007, p. 289
56 | P a g e
Between 1960 and 1966, the new independent state initially got tin its account existing
land legislation according to which land acquired privately is outside the jurisdiction
of the state. So in Kivu management of land rights, forestry and mining is transferred
to the Belgium-African of Kivu (SOBAKI) thus excluding the Congolese state.
o 1966: The Congolese government puts an end to a colonial land laws. By
Ordinance-Law No. 66-343 of 7 June 1966, named "Bakajika law," the
Republic of Congo (Zaire) takes over all land, forestry and mining rights
granted or assigned during colonization.
o 1971: two laws (Law No. 71-008 and No. 71-009 of 31 December 1971) containing
the amendment the Constitution, states (Article 10) that "the soil and under
soil/underground of Zaire and their natural products belong to State ".
o 1973: Law No. 73-021 of 20 July 1973 on the general property, real estate and land
tenure and security regime is adopted. It reaffirms the principle in 1966 according to
which "the ground is wholly owned and inalienable by the State" (Art. 53), which only
grants the participating rights in the form of concessions to individuals physically or
morally5.
o 1980: in the middle of "making of Zaire" the Law No. 80-008 of 18 July 1980 amends
and supplements Law No. 73-021 which focuses on the transformation in perpetuating
all rights to land acquired by "Zairians” before 1980. "Any right to own land that was
acquired regularly by Zairians, individuals, before the entry into force of this Act, is
converted, provided that it has been materialized by valorization which complies with
laws and regulations in a perpetual franchise fee [...] "(Article 4 amending Article 369
of Law No. 73-021).
Law No. 73-021 of 20 July 1973 on the general property, land tenure and property security regime is
considered the fundamental text of land legislation in the DRC.
To date, all the texts supplementing Law No. 73-021 are the Land Code of the DRC. They are
published in the special issue of the Official Journal of 5 April 20066.
VIII.2: FUNDAMENTAL LEGISLATION ON FARMING.
Fundamental legislation on farming aims at formulating policies concerning acquisition and
distribution of farming land, cessation of land ownership rights and ways of resolving
conflicts arising from land ownership. All these issues are covered in chapter two of this new
law on farming.
We examine various policy issues as adopted by the National Assembly during the ordinary
session of March, 2011 dated 4 / May / 2011.
Section 1: Distribution of farming land
Article 23
Farming land is granted to farmers as specified in the law on land distribution and ownership.
Article 24
The farming contract determines the types of crops to be grown by the concessionaire.
5 MAFIKIRI TSONGO A., op.cit., in De VILLERS G. (dir.), Phénomènes informels et dynamiques croplles en
Afrique, Cahiers africains/Africa studieux, n°19-20, 1996, pp.46-62. 6 Journal Officiel de la RDC, Code foncier, n° spécial, 5 avril 2006, p. 24.
57 | P a g e
It also determines the minimum production levels to be attained by the farmer.
Article 25
Rights on the acquired farming land by virtue of usage are exercised in accordance with the
law.
The local communities practice farming activities, pasture growing and leaving it fallow.
Section 2: Cessation of land rights
Article 28
Farming concessions are transferable in accordance with the law.
Section 3: Land leasing
Article 29
According to the present legislation, land leasing is governed by the common law.
Article 30
The farming concessionaire has the right to rent at least two thirds of his concession to
another party. The concessionaire must notify the local administration of this step.
The concessionaire together with the tenant takes full responsibility for this process and is
answerable to the state for the signed obligations in the farming contract.
For this case, concession can be either be the object of land lease or lease with tenant farming,
and should conform to the law and state land lease regulations.
Article 31
When the farming concession is rent out, the tenant benefits from the right of preemption in
case of cessation provided he has a not emphasized the agricultural concession.
Section 4: Agricultural land conflicts
Article 32
Conflicts arising from ownership of agricultural land of the local communities can only be
addressed by judicial authorities if they were subjected beforehand to the conciliation
procedure, on the initiative of one of the parties before the provincial advisory organ or that of
decentralized territorial entity envisaged in article 4(15).
Article 33
The reconciliation procedure breaks the limitation period envisaged in the common law from
the reception of the request for reconciliation by the provincial advisory organ or that of a
decentralized territorial entity envisaged in article 4 (15).
In case reconciliation does not take place, the case is brought, by the active party, to the
hearing of a more competent jurisdiction within three months from the reception of a verbal
trial of non-reconciliation.
This same law also envisages in article 17 that nothing should be expropriated by lands
acquired on the basis of the law or taken advantage of on the basis of public interest.
These different dispositions are, to a large extent, likely to complete and improve the land
system in force in DRC.
.
VIII.3. LEGISLATION GOVERNING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE
CUSTOMARY LEADERS AND THE FARMERS IN THE NORTHERN PROVINCE
OF KIVU
At provincial level, another initiative of law, popularly known as ‘a decree’ is being discussed
in northern Kivu province assembly. This decree initiated by the Forum des Amis de la Terre
(F.A.T) is an experimental project driven by the customary leaders in land management. On
the whole, the following dispositions are to take into account the security of the small farmers
58 | P a g e
and apply to the customary leaders, land owners, agrarian farmers and other participants in the
agricultural sector.
It also highlights the rights and duties of customary leaders, land owners, farmers and the
administrative systems.
Article 9 stipulates this ‘The customary leaders have the right to participate in preliminary
enquiries of the envisaged concession articles 193 - 203 of law N º 73/021 of July 20th, 1973
as changed this day’.
For the duties of the customary leaders, article 19 highlights what follows: ‘In case it proved
that the landowning leader is involved in either way, closely or from a distance, directly or
indirectly with the reasons of the conflict which drove led to the commotion, the losing party
and/or if need be, both parties lodge a complaint before competent judicial organs’.
The losing party has the right to an equivalent indemnity as the landowning leader. It is illegal
for land owning leaders to sell the already allocated land. The ultimate initiative of land sale
must come from the farmer and the landowning leader (Art 32).
The biggest feature and innovation to be acknowledged in this legislation is the clear place of
women as far as the land question is concerned. In fact, in article 22, it is recorded:
‘Customary leaders must enforce the law that discourages them and others from practicing
any discriminating tendencies which prevent women from owning natural resources
especially land. Consequently, these leaders should put in place measures that will facilitate
land ownership by women achieve.’
As can be seen, DRC already has a juridical mechanism which should be known, understood
and taken advantage of/exploited.
VIII.4.THE CHARACTERISTICS OF LAND SYSTEM IN FORCE
The Land Code published in the Official Gazette in April 2006 is a document of 99 pages. Law No.
73-021, which alone has 399 articles, is a procedural document and complex.
The land tenure system is characterized as follows:
- The State is the sole owner of all land. The state nationalized “made public” all lands
including the so-called "indigenous land". Article 387 in fact defines that "the land occupied
by local communities become from the entry into force of this Act, public lands."
- Land property no longer exists: the land rights granted by the State to individuals in the form
of concessions are rights of use. The granting of the latter is subject to the development of
land, according to those rights.
Thus, as explained by Professor Rochegude, in the Congolese land system there is no
"opposition between public law and land right”. What exists is "only one category, public
lands, which provides access to land rights which are never property in the civil sense"7.
Besides this, the issue of customary rights remains omnipresent.
The state land which consists of public lands includes a public and a private domain.
The public domain "consists of all land for public use or service" (Art. 55): bed of lakes, rivers,
waters, etc.
The private domain is composed of "all other lands" outside the public domain. The rights of
use of such land shall be granted to either public or private persons with a certificate of
registration which serves as the basis for the establishment of a perpetual, ordinary or service
lease. The free concession or concession without charges is "the contract by which the state
recognizes a community, a physical or moral individual with public or private right, rights of
7 ROCHEGUDE, A., PLANCON, C., « Décentralisation, acteurs locaux et foncier », Fiche pays : République
Démocratique du Congo, Comité Technique foncier et développement, 2009, p.15.
59 | P a g e
use" (Article 61). The conditions for awarding concessions vary according to (1) the land size
requested for and (2) to whether they are rural or urban (that is to say included in the of an
entity declared urban)8.
Law No. 73-021 specifies the procedures for awarding concessions: the awarding of a
concession is subject to an investigation commonly called. "Vacant land survey" designed to
"ascertain the nature and extent of the rights that third parties could have on land under
request for concession" (Article 193). It includes: "no 1: On-site verification of the
delimitation of the land requested, [...] no 4: the hearing of those voice their complaints or
comments/demands verbally, [...]" (Art 194). This investigation is "conducted by the
Commissioner of area or by an officer or civil servant in the Commissioner office" in the rural
area and this is the "agricultural officer" who undertakes the investigation.
“The lands that are part of the private domain of the state are urban or rural" (Art. 60).
- Urban farms such as described in Act No. 73-021 located in the urban constituencies;
- Rural land is the “remaining” land after subtraction of urban land. They are:
o lands granted,
o Land allocated to the public domain
o land occupied by local communities.
Confusion relating to customary rights:
One of the main sources of confusion induced by Act No. 73-021 addresses the "customary
law" and the conditions on which to base a concession right. Indeed, the land occupied and
used by local communities "individually or collectively, in accordance with local customs and
practices" (Art. 388) are in the private domain of the State. In addition, "The rights of use
lawfully acquired on these lands will be regulated by an Order of the President of the
Republic" (Art. 389). This ordinance was never enacted and has therefore, left the customary
land rights in a state of confusion and uncertainty.
Thus,
- On one hand, the law removes the management of land from the traditional authorities.
- Secondly, the lack of an order of the President of the Republic suggests that the land occupied
"in accordance with local customs and practices" still fall within the customary law.
For Professor Mugangu Matabaro, the ambiguity of customary rights is threefold:
1. in the legal regime of the land, that is to say the rules applicable to these lands, 2. level of
management authority, 3. at the nature of the rights of farmers.. »
In fact, to Matthew Paul, the "legal loophole" makes the customary rights "vulnerable
compared to other rights (mainly the concessions granted to private individuals) whose
procedures and written sureties are explicitly defined».
Procedures not followed
The procedure for granting a concession is long, complex and subject to corruption. The most
fundamental point of the procedure for consideration and respect for customary rights is
unfortunately one that is often sloppy. This is the "initial inquiry into the concession."
It is common to have false inquiries undertaken with or without complicity by the customary
or administrative authorities.
8 ROCHEGUDE, A., PLANCON, C., op. cit.
60 | P a g e
The modalities/procedures for awarding concessions are a favorable ground for all kinds of
manipulations. In fact according to the size and location of land applied for, the competent
authorities are not the same (see table below). In practice, sometimes concessions covering
large areas are granted from the capital without informing the populations and less still calling
for enquiries to find out if the land is vacant. .
Competent Authority Acreage granted
Rural lands Urban lands
Parliament ≥ 2000 ha ≥ 100 ha
President of the Republic > 1000 ha et < 2000 ha > 50 ha et < 100 ha
Ministry of Land Affaires > 200 ha et ≥ 1000 ha > 10 ha et ≤50 ha
Governor of the Province ≤ 200 ha ≤ 10 ha
Conservator of Land Titles < 10 ha <50 a
Similarly, occupants not aware of the applications for concessions by a third party can not
assert their right in period of two (2) years allotted for this purpose. After two years, the
certificate of registration becomes unassailable. "The actions against him are pitiful, even if it
is received by mistake, surprise or fraud9 ». Obviously these actions are often lengthy and
costly and are rarely accessible to the occupants.
Even beyond violations of the law, conducting inquiries in rural areas pose real technical
problems because on the one hand, of the vast area of land and secondly, the lack of qualified
persons to undertake this.
Confusion on the "survival" of ancient title deeds and documents issued by third parties
If the Act provides for the conversion, in perpetuity, the land rights legally obtained before
1980, in practice, users continue to produce old documents to try to justify their right to
occupy land or a house. This is the landlord book, the land form, the allotment certificate, the
certificate of right of occupation or even the sale agreement from a traditional chief.
Yet according to article 390 of Law No. 73-021 "From the commencement of this Act," the
right of occupancy "found by" the landlord’s book "or equivalent to a title issued in a town or
area of the Republic is abolished. "
Thus, only the landlord books and other documents before the entry into force of the Land
Act are eligible for access to the right in perpetuity. The documents issued after that date by
the registrar of real estate properties do not in principle have legal value.
However, as explained by Professor Mugangu Matabaro, "these provisions are often ignored
by the land authorities as well as the local territorial authorities (Mayors, territorial
administrators, leaders, chiefs of sectors, groups, localities), which, according to practice,
"regulate" contradicting situations to the law or simply attribute without having knowledge
issue titles of land" (fragmented records)».
9 MUGANGU MATABARO S., op. cit., p. 30.
61 | P a g e
Lack of systematic conversion of the old land titles (those prior to 1973), without training nor
awareness, often ill-informed users are vulnerable: they hide behind documents that do not or
no longer secure them.
The range of codes
Parallel to the Land Code, there is a DRC Mining Code and a Forest Code, each having a
different a register. These complex codes also fall sometimes in competition with the land
tenure system.
The Mining Code was established by the Act No. 007/2002 of 11 July 2002, and
specified by the Implementing Decree No. 038/2003 of 26 March 2003, with mining
regulations.
According to the Mining Code, the State owns the minerals both on the earth surface
and under the earth surface.
It states among other things that rights under a mining concession are distinct from
those of a land concession.
o It is a matter of different allusions to private property even though it is non-
existent in Law No. 73-021. It is in fact a matter in Article 132 of the "owner
of land."
o Access to mineral resources is subject to the prior consent of the "owner" or
legal occupier. Once established, "the owner or lessee is, expected to repair the
damages caused by the work, and even authorized, to perform as part of his
mining activities" (Art. 280). Similarly, if the land is rendered unfit for culture,
the "rights holders" of land must be compensated.
o In case of dispute, the Mining Code provides for the settlement "by all non-
judicial remedies, including transaction, compromise, and arbitration or
before a judicial police officer or a public officer».
As is the case for land code, procedures to recognize the rights of local populations
which therefore hinder the granting of mining concessions are rarely implemented.
Beyond the manipulation, identification of rights holders is difficult because (1) they
generally have no document to assert their rights and (2) the mining sites are often
remote enclosed areas where there social structure is not well elaborated and hence
where traditional authorities are less present.
As a result, and in practice, persons granted a mining concession on lands not subject
to any registration with the land administration see their rights as secure. This is why
the people believe that mining legislation prevails over land rights.
The Forest Code was established by Law No. 011/2002 of 29 August 2002 and
supplemented by various implementing regulations put together in a special issue of
the Official Gazette of November 6, 2002.
According to the Forest Code, "forests are the property of the State" (Art. 7).
o Forests are in three categories:
� classified forests in the public domain of the State;
� protected forests (not classified) in the private domain of the State and
may be subject to concessions excluding any real right in land ;
� forests for permanent production.
o Local communities can obtain a concession or part of protected forest in areas
"lawfully possessed under the custom" (Article 22)
62 | P a g e
o "The natural or planted forests included in land granted under the land laws
belong to their dealers. - The rights to these forests are exercised in
compliance with the provisions of this Act and its implementing measures
"(Article.8)
The classification of forests is done by the Ministry of Environment, Nature
Conservation and Tourism. Local communities occupying the forests are often
classified in a certain class in the capital. They are victims of the myth that "forests are
empty."
VIII.5. THE CHANGING PRACTICES AND CUSTOMS
A number of land conflicts in the DRC and Kivu are related to (1) the ignorance of local
customs or lack of consideration of these customs in policies and (2) to customary changes
which have occurred in history. Customs have changed; traditional authorities have acquired
new powers which have all contributed to social change particularly in the rural areas.
The different visions of the land as the origin of conflicts
The different visions of the land of the actors in Congo explains in part the land conflicts.
There are:
- (1) An opposition between the “customary” vision and the “civil” vision of land. In
Congo generally, the civil notions of « private property », of « vacant land and without
owners » introduced by the colonizer is opposed to as compared to the customary
vision in which land belongs to the community.
- (2) An opposition between the indeginous peoples vision and that of the migrant
populations. In Kivu in particular the different visions identified different strategies of
access to land.
For indigenous people in Kivu, "the sense of territory is defined by the relationship between
ethnicity, authority (tribal chief) and a portion of space. Access to land is inseparable from
the participation in a network of social relations. " In receiving land, beneficiary person is
subject to obligations of loyalty embodied by various tributes and levies and the provision of
services to traditional authorities.
For migrant populations, including the Banyarwanda, land is an object of individual
development devoid of personal relationships.
o In Kivu, the non-recognition by the migrants of social dependency on
traditional leaders has been a source of indigenous land disputes in the fifties.
In a simplified way, migrants do not consider themselves as belonging to the
local community (and/or is not considered by the natives as their own) did not
recognize customary authority and thus free from all responsibility and loyalty
to them.
o The need for social independence vis-à-vis the indigenous chiefs will lead
some migrants, legitimate or not, to use land law to access to land. According
to this legislation, the piece of titled land is out of the jurisdiction of chiefs.
The holder of the property doesn’t have recognition or responsibility towards
the traditional authorities. And we must remember that they obtain titles in
order to escape the authority of traditional leaders in land matters. Refer to
63 | P a g e
table number; CNKI block already presented and the table on lands that are
object of transactions for the 2000- 2010 period.
Land is not seen in the same way by all the actors. This is why, in terms of these visions, the
actors will base themselves on different strategies in order to access land.
• For some, land is not an independent object, but constitutes an inseparable object from
the relation with the community. The management of use rights which apply to these
land is done by the customary authorities. Land doesn’t belong to one person and is
not subject for sale. With this vision, the actors access use rights vie customary
procedures.
• For others, land is a stand alone object, clearly distinct from social considerations
(always contradicting) and destined for valorization. Land is an object for sale and
could actually be bought or sold. With this vision, actors are distant from social
customary considerations while accessing land privately and use rights through the
land legislation/law.
With history and together with current realities, these differing perceptions on land are
opposing and are a source of land conflicts in the DRC.
Local community land practices in North Kivu
The local indeginous populations are mainly from Nande, Nyanga, Tembo and Hunde tribes.
In the customary land design notably of the Nande, land belongs to the whole community and
territory management is done by royal families at the clan or supraclan level10
. The socio-
political power (Vwami) is held by a triumvirat composed of a religious chief (Mukulu), a
political chief (Mwami), and a military chief (Ngabwe) all belonging to the same fratrie and
the land power is on the religious chief, le mukulu and other different land chiefs (Bakama).
The Bakamas are descendants of «recognized families established long time ago in the
country who are believed to be the first occupants of the land, during the very first migration
» they « are members of Mwami lineage who have acquired customarily specific land
prerogatives ». «It is them who redistribute land to other members of the community ».
Communities therefore access land use rights according to the principles of a society lineae:
from father to son. Women are excluded from land inheritance. One of the reasons given is
that women are married and would transfer land rights to her husband and hence to another
family.
For different reasons (economic, social and political), in selling land, the customary
authorities (whether one of the members of truimvirat or Bakama) have contributed to the
questioning of the customary practice and therefore has been a source, historically, of land
conflicts.
With their role, whether known or not, it is difficult to identify exactly who, in the customary
power organization made decisions which would go against the custom. It would seem that
the selling of customary land is done at different levels of the customary power chain. If the
situation varies from clan to clan, then different studies mention the Mwami (politcal chiefs)
as being the main people responsible for customary actions.
Generally, today, the guarantors of custom/tradition: «customary chiefs play lesser role as
guarantors of customry rights and are more of colluders with modern, commercial, political,
administrative elites since they currently depend on traditional chiefs to maintain their
statusand them for their revenue »11
10
PALUKU KITAKYA, A. op. cit., p. 289. 11
MATHIEU P., MAFIKIRI TSONGO A., op. cit.
64 | P a g e
Redirecting the land management powers of the customary authorities
The land legislation:
- Withdraws from the customary authorities their power of customary land
management. However, by default, the « legal void » gives them a certain legitimacy
in management of rural lands not concessioned by the land administration.
- Takes away from customary chiefs their rights to land ; the concessionors are not
legally bound to them.
- Excludes customary chiefs from their power of management and thus their rights to
royalties on rural land became urban land.
Therefore the traditional authorities are gradually moved from their (1) right to
manage land which is one of the foundations of the custom and (2) their source of
income constitution these charges.
The role of customary authorities in the territorial administration
Since colonization, traditional authorities have been equipped with particular functions in
administration.
- The colonial state gave them the authority to preside over the customary tribunals to
Mwami (the recognized and integrated authority in the judicial constitution of the
state).
- In 1973, the Bamis became the community chiefs and thus official elements in the
administrative and command chains of the capital in the rural areas
- In the same period, they became presidents of the unique party MPR in the
communities.
The 2006 constitution reaffirms the administrative role of the Mwamis. They are the chiefs of
the decentralized entity: chiefdom. The chief of the chiefdom is “designated by the local
custom with respect to the law on the status of customary chiefs” then included in the
Gorvenor of the Province (Art. 67 and 80 of the organic law n° 08/016 of 07 october 2008 on
composition, organisation and functioning of the Decentralized Territorial Entitiies and their
relations with the State and the Provinces). «the limits […] of the chiefdoms are fixed by the
Prime Minister’s Decree taken on the proposal of the Minister of Republic and internal
affairs in its powes, with assent from the Provincial Assembly ».
The leadership bodies are: the council of chiefs whose members are elected on universal
suffrage and the executif electoral body composed of the chief of the chiefdom without
mentionning any land according to Article 84 of the Law mentioned earlier. « ensures to […]
b) safeguarding heritage and, especially: […] b. management area/ domain; ».
The roles and responsabilites of the chief of chiefdom and the customary chief (Mwami) are
elements of confusion for the local populations.
The customary authorities progressively acted as “extensions of the state” which (have as
consequence an antagonizing process between the customary authority and its social
foundations in local communities, and a social transformation in rural areas »12
VIII.6. PARTIAL CONCLUSION
12
VAN ACKER, V., La « pembénisation » du Haut-Kivu : opportunisme et droits fonciers revisités.
65 | P a g e
According to Professor Mugangu Matabaro «the land problem in eastern DRC is
fundamentally in terms of management, and that is to say, the legal status of exploiters on the
one hand and the institutional framework of management on the other hand ».
Two systems of land management coexist in Congo:
- A legal system for the implementation of Land Code, however, it has been heavily
ciritized for many years because:
o Certain complex provisions are not applicable
o Source of confusion (though translated in local languages), for the users and
the administrative authorities who are charged with its application.
- Local and customary practices. Faced with cumbersome and costly official security
procedures, and given the "legal vacuum" of customary rights, local actors develop
and use the means of securing land alongside the Act. These practices allow
recognition and securing local transactions and access to land. However these:
o Are extremely fragile in the context (1) high pressure on land as in Kivu and
(2) challenging the customary authorities,
o do not preserve the populations of attempted robberies from external and local
actors to their advantage and sometimes fraudulently legal procedures.
Currently, neither of the two management systems ensures security of land belonging
to the poorest.
One of the key issues of land issue in DRC and Kivu in particular is to develop a
system which combines traditional practices of land access and administrative
management regulated by law.
IX. REGIONAL, CONTINENTAL AND INTERNATIONAL INITIATIVES:
Some initiatives to limit or counter large scale land grabbing are taken from here and
there but without real impact on the lives of small-scale producers en DRC.
We present in this paragraph what the leaders of some organizations need to know in order to
integrate them in their struggle and get maximize profits that they offer.
1. The charter of the SADC states in management of natural resources including land.
2. Very recently, the Dakar Declaration, made by the world at the World Social Forum that
just took place in Dakar in February 2011.
3. . African Unity declaration for the management of natural resources, including land. The
code of good conduct and guidelines for transparency and accountability on land issues in the
third world countries.
4. The volunteers’ directives that FAO and the UN are establishing through major
consultations with all stakeholders: political, economic and the civil society.
5. It should be noted here "PIDESC" International Covenant on Social and cultural
Rights which is a tool that some players want to put in place to force the states who have
signed this pact of voluntary directives to comply with and implement these
commitments. This complement to the pact, like the others is far from being signed by the
States concerned.
The greatest weakness we can not in relation to these initiatives is that they are voluntary in
nature and therefore are not binding for the states and the various signatories.
66 | P a g e
X. CASES OF FARMERS STRUGGLE THAT CAN SERVE AS EXAMPLES OF
DEFENDING LAND RIGHTS.
67 | P a g e
XI. CASES THAT CAN SERVE AS EXAMPLES OF FIGHTING FOR DEFENDING OF SMALLSCALE FARMER LAND RIGHTS
IN NORTH KIVU PROVINCE.
Note: This list is not exhaustive. It is for illustrative purposes that we decided to integrate this small paragraph, to show the many readers
and actors that there exists in the province examples that can serve as future actions to be undertaken in a much broader program. There are
certainly many other more interesting cases than those we presented here. The various EAFF officials together with its members must make an
effort to identify, add value and develop and strengthen them if necessary
.
N° ACTORS EXPERIENCE OBSERVATIONS
LOCAL CIVIL SOCIETY INITIATIVES
1. SYDIP - Codification of principles of customary land.
- Training of rural paralegals
- Legal support in courts and tribunals.
Many communities now have the customary principles
codified. This avoids manipulations and doubtful
interpretations by the different actors through the decrease in
oral operations.
2. AAP - Legal support for the vulnerable in courts.
- Have in place a CEJ – Centre for Legal
Justice.
- Land security through supporting the
vulnerable in the process for obtaining legal
documents
Enriching experience where they focused on the peaceful
resolution of conflicts through Centers for Legal Counseling
3. FOPAC - Training of rural
- Lobbying around the agriculture code
- Supporting the process of installing CARGs
in the territories and communities in the
province
- Good coalition strategy with other land actors both
government and civil society.
- Multifaceted approach from legal support to technical
support in protection and conservation of soil and
agricultural production.
- The agricultural code has been adopted by the Congolese
National Assembly.
4. F.AT. - Lobbying around the land laws, agricultural
Code at the national level
- More oriented towards lobbying and advocacy in order to
have more equitable laws in management of land by
68 | P a g e
- Lobbying around the improvement of
customary practices in land issues through
having in place the Code of Conduct for
traditional leaders in land management.
- Several surveys and studies around the land
issues.
-Support in networking of actors in land issues
in the province through the CECAF –
Framework for Exchange and Dialogue for
Land Actors in North Kivu.
government authorities. Agricultural Code recently adopted
by the national assembly as the code of good conduct for the
traditional leaders in land matters, has been treated by the
provincial assembly. It is scheduled for adoption in June.
- Good networking initiative for land actors in the province.
- Good collaboration between the government authorities
and customary leadership.
5. CECAF - Network of local actors involved in land in
North Kivu province
- Initiative still young but promising as it can help avoid
duplication, creating positive synergies and harmonization of
interventions as well as the implementation of common
strategies around key provincial issues and problems
6. UWAKI - Put in place dialogue committees around the
land issues in the territories.
- Defend the women land rights.
- Dialogue committees to give support especially in terms of
gender and access by women to land.
7. LOFEPACO - Defending women land rights. -Training of women leaders for lobbying in gender and
women acces to land.
8. ASP - Conflict resolution through legal support for
the vulnerable in the courts and tribunals.
- Several studies on land problem/issue in
Masisi territory;
- Peaceful conflict resolution approach at the local level.
9. PREPYG - Defending land rights for the pygmy people - Good initiative for these marginalized people and whose
land rights are violated and land grabbed by other people.
10. APRODEPED - Securing land through by supporting the
vulnerable in acquiring land documents/titles.
-Training of leaders and customary chiefs on
matters relating to land.
- Good approach of integration and bringing together of
customary chiefs and the leaders of the people.
11. CACUDEKI - Training of paralegals and customary chiefs
in land issues.
- Good initiative in bringing together the administration, the
customary leaders and the populations.
69 | P a g e
GOVERNMENT INITIATIVES
12. STAREC - Conflict resolution through putting in place of
CFLPs - Local Land Committees for conflict
resolution and Peace.
- Government initiative for peace in the East of D.R.C.
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND UNITED NATIONS SYSTEMS INITIATIVES.
13. UN HABITAT - Conflit resolution through having in place
local committees for land reconciliation.
- Coordination national and international land
actors clusters at the provincial level.
- Interesting support in that it builds the existing local
dynamics instead of investing directly in the resolution of
conflicts on the ground.
- Good initiative for defending the land rights of the
displaced and refugee populations
14. NRC - Land conflict resolution through putting in
place of local committees in charge of conflict
resolution.
- Defending the rights of the displaced and the
refugees
- Good initiaitive that complements UN HABITAT.
- an effective collaboration with local organizations is still
necessary.
15. H.C.R - Defending refugee land rights - Internation initiative specialized in defending the rights of
refugees. Putting in place committees for refugees.
XII. SOME RECOMMENDATIONS AND STRATEGIES PROPOSED TO THE LEADERS OF EAFF FOR FIGHTING AGAINST
LAND GRABBING.
N° ACTORS STRATEGIES AND POLICIES
70 | P a g e
LOCAL NATIONAL REGIONAL INTERNATIONAL
1. Government - Collect
comprehensive
information for its
efficient use.
- undertake lobbying for
decentralization.
- Be integrated and
participate in the work of
the different reform
commissions and put in plac
laws on land and other
natural resources. Law on
land, animal rearing,
fisheries etc.
- Create alliances
with other
organizations and
initiatives not only
for signing
agreements and
pacts but for their
effective
application.
Same as the regional level
- Participate in
decentalized land
management organs.
- Build alliances with other
actors in order to have more
force including government
organs.
- engage with
regional
organizations for
powerful lobbying
at this level.
Collaboration with international
organizations and make use of
international tools for protection
smallscale farmer land rights.
- Build capacities of
local organizations so
they can demand
accountability from
the local leaders.
- Insist on the application
and respecting of
agreements and covenants
that the country has signed.
- Disseminate the various
national and international
tools ;
- Disseminate and
make use of all the
opportunities
(regional
organizations, pacts
and agreements) for
smallscale farmers’
land rights.
Same as the regional level
2. Companies/enterprises. Build capacities of
farmer organizations
and unions to assert
their legitimate rights
on land.
- Learn about the congolese
and other tax facilities
Collaborate with
other farmer
organizations in the
region in order to
make use of the
OHADA system in
order to understand
the acquisition
- Undertake lobbying for the
accountability and transparency in
the land market in DRC in
particular and in Africa generally.
ILC « International Land
Coalition » is particularly active
in this and can be a good
partner/ally.
71 | P a g e
mecanism of land
markets.
Build negotiation
capacities for
developement and
investment proposals
by the enterprises.
Develop a set of
specification for
community
development.
Undertake lobbying for
more justice and equity
among the indeigenous
populations.
Develop professional
unionists where job
are offered by the
established
enterprises/companies.
Put in place conditions for
qualified local workforce.
3. Purchasers/buyers Negotiating for
valuing by the local
communities of
regular and legally
acquired concessions.
Insist on a land reformE for
the recovery of land
fraudulently acquired.
Organize and
African campaign
for the rights of
indeginous people
on their resources
and especially land
resource.
To do lobbying for the respect of
guidelines and principles of
equity and morality and especially
for the European companies
A coexistence pact
between the large and
small scale operators
in the rural areas.
Insist of regularizing if not
fair and equitable
compensation by the
acquirers/purchasers.
As above. Collaborate with organizations
from the North for lobbying in
order to preserve the country’s
land for general development of
the DRC.
4. Local elite Build capacities for
negotiation of
contracts for untapped
concessions.
Insist om more just and
equitable laws which
prevents concentration of
land among a few political,
72 | P a g e
economic or intellectual
elite.
Undertake a
systematic census of
non exploited
concessions while
indicating their
owners. (This study
has just produced a
draft).
Which civil society to insist
on accountability of leaders.
?
Insist on mandatory
declaration of property by
public servants before
taking office.
?
5. Customary chiefs. Insist on respecting of
customary principles
in the management of
customary land.
Redefine the role of
customary chiefs in land
management.
Who in the
countries have been
able to improve the
role and status of
the customary
chiefs?
Support the putting in
place of local land
commissions or the
CCL as provided for
by the agricultural
code.
Support FAT efforts in
putting in place a good code
of conduct for the
customary chiefs for land
management.
Associate ANATC
with other activities of
smallscale farmer
organizations.
Collaborate with ANATC –
National Alliance for
Traditional Authorities in
Congo.
5. Smallscale farmer
organizations.
Strengthen local
actors in monitoring
Put in place and streghnthen
a farmer movement at the
Connect big farmer
federations with to
73 | P a g e
of land transactions, in
land registry
national level as is the case
in other countries.
other movements in
other countries.
Have in place a specialized
service for lobbying in the
farmer organisations
especially those at the
regional and national level.
Establish a regional
office or an
observation
mechanism for land
grabbing in the
developing
countries DRC
included.
74 | P a g e
XIII. SOME BUSINESS MODELS BETWEEN FARMER ORGANIZATIONS
AND OTHER ACTORES IN LAND GRABBING PHENOMENON.
Several elements of models have already been mentioned in the paragraph of
strategies and policies. The following aspects should, however, be highlighted:
There is no one large-scale acquisition, concentration, ownership known as land grab
which is the only model for production model. Several other models exist and can be
experimented on in DRC in general and in North Kivu in particular. They are:
1. Making available to locals land and their lease by businesses. This system
allows the farmers to retain ownership of their land and contribute to a rational
exploitation of these lands through a clear and specific contract on the operating
modes of the land. For example, limiting the use of pesticides, fertilizers and other
harmful techniques greedy and hence irrational non viable use of land...
2. The integration of “land” inputs in operating capital of the investors. This
option has the advantage for indigenous populations to participate in the profits
acquired by the enterprise (business). And at the same time, it has the danger of
participating in losses due to poor management of business or bankruptcy of the
company. The greatest difficulty would be evaluation in figures of this “land” capital
contribution. We must have expertise which is not always available in several
developing countries. The DRC and the province of North Kivu unfortunately do not
escape this sad reality.
3. Modernnizing smallscale agriculture : This formula consists of what an
enterprise would want to exploit, or engage especially in supporting smallscale
farmers so that they can produce better (in quality and quantity) so as to supply raw
materials to the enterprise or company. To do this the enterprise not only provides
technical support – supply of inputs (improved seeds, fertilizers…) but also support in
provides market flow of farmer produce at remunerative prices. This model
developed tens of years ago in certain territories of North Kivu has bore good fruits.
The MIDEMA case for wheat and the CEE Kivu programme for reintroduction of
palm oil are such examples. This system offers the advantage of leaving and
motivating/encouraging the land owners to invest more in their land for more
profitability.
4. Intergrate in the upward and downward production chaine. If there exists a
market for a given agricultural product; there’ll certainly exist a market for the inputs
and outputs of this product. The companies/enterprises do not have to be transformed
into producers. They can be integrated into the production chain upwards or
downwards to the consumer level. It is an issue of being specialized and moving on
to a profitable level in which there’s more value added. The models already exist in
countries in southern Africa, and in other continents and it would be appropriate to
visit them to get inspiration from them.
5. In all cases, we must not fall in a trap where we are opposed to large scale
agricultural production. We should rather analyze the complementarities that exist
between the two production models. This will allow for improvement of negative
perceptions that some have vis-à-vis the others.
75 | P a g e
XIV: GENERAL CONCLUSION.
Bibliography.