Academic literature on the topic 'Land tenure (Germanic law)'

This article examines the concept of proprietary expectations in the context of the Anglo-Saxon legal system. It analyzes the nature and significance of property expectations for individuals and companies operating in this legal system. Research focuses on how property expectations affect legal relationships, including contractual obligations, property, and other aspects of civil law. Understanding this concept is important for the effective functioning of the legal system and ensuring justice in society. The Anglo-Saxon legal system, emerging in England before the Norman Conquest of 1066, provides a fascinating study of early medieval property law. This legal framework was characterized by its integration of customary practices, local judicial decisions, and evolving notions of land tenure and ownership. The period saw the development of property expectations rooted in both communal obligations and individual rights, laying foundational principles that would influence English common law.The Anglo-Saxon period (circa 410-1066 AD) was marked by a transition from Roman to Germanic influences, profoundly affecting legal conceptions of property. Land was the primary source of wealth and power, and its control was crucial for maintaining social and political structures. Early Anglo-Saxon laws, as recorded in various legal codes such as those of King Æthelberht, King Ine, and King Alfred, reflect a blend of tribal customs and practical needs of agrarian communities. Property was primarily communal, with the king or local lords acting as custodians of land. The concept of “bookland” (land granted by charter) versus “olkland” (land held by customary right) illustrates the dual nature of property rights, blending formal grants with traditional usage. Inheritance laws were pivotal in ensuring the continuity of landholding families. Male primogeniture was not strictly followed; instead, property could be divided among sons, and even daughters could inherit under certain conditions. Wills and charters often provided detailed instructions for the division of land, reflecting both family intentions and societal norms. Disputes over property were common and were resolved through a mix of local assemblies (moots), royal courts, and ecclesiastical adjudication. Witness testimony and oath-taking were critical in establishing claims, underscoring the importance of community reputation and support. The Church played a significant role in property matters, both as a major landowner and as an influencer of legal principles. Monasteries and bishoprics received extensive land grants, often protected by royal charters. The Church’s involvement added a spiritual dimension to property rights, intertwining religious duty with legal obligations. Over the Anglo-Saxon period, there was a gradual shift from collective to more individualistic notions of property. This transition was facilitated by the increasing use of written charters, which provided clearer, legally enforceable records of land transactions. The development of more formalized legal procedures also contributed to this evolution, offering more consistent mechanisms for resolving disputes and enforcing property rights. The property expectations and legal practices of the Anglo-Saxon era laid the groundwork for the feudal system introduced by the Normans. Many principles, such as the importance of written documentation, judicial dispute resolution, and the interplay between royal authority and local customs, persisted and evolved into the common law traditions of England. The Anglo-Saxon legal system’s treatment of property provides invaluable insights into the early development of English law. By balancing communal norms with emerging individual rights, it established enduring principles that would shape the trajectory of property law in medieval England and beyond. Understanding these early legal frameworks helps to appreciate the complexities and continuities in the history of English property law.

AbstractMany areas in Africa facing land shortage and competition witness increasingly restricted and insecure access to land for the poor majority. Mounting evidence of reduced tenure security shows that customary systems are often unable to evolve equitably. In contrast with this crisis in customary land administration, current international land policy is witnessing renewed interest in customary tenure systems. Ghana's current land policy resonates with this international trend. This article focuses on peri-urban Kumasi, Ghana, to acquire an insight into struggles and negotiations over customary land tenure in a rapidly urbanizing area. It then tries to explain why policymakers, in Ghana and in general, do not yet seem to have reflected the crisis in customary land management in their policies. The article concludes with some recommendations as to how policymakers could respond.

In this article, I reflect on the implication of the urban land tenure systems of the three political regimes of Ethiopia on the objective element of land tenure security of urban landholders, particularly, permit holders. The objective element of land tenure security can be assessed in terms of clarity and breadth, duration, assurance, and enforceability of land rights. On these foundations, I argue that the objective element of tenure security of urban landholders in Ethiopia has been reduced with each subsequent regime. The Imperial regime’s urban land tenure system affected the objective land tenure security of urban landholders in terms of enforceability of land rights—particularly limiting the right to appeal to a presumably independent court of law with regard to the amount of compensation awarded for the loss of land rights through expropriation. The Derg regime’s urban land tenure system, on the other hand, had narrowed the breadth of land rights to possessory right; it introduced other grounds in addition to expropriation, by which a landholder could lose his land rights, it adopted a vague and broad understanding of “public purpose” for expropriation, and it introduced a compensation scheme that left a landholder compensated inadequately; and it totally prohibited bringing a legal action in presumably an independent court of law against the government. Even more, the post-1991 urban land tenure system has perpetuated the objective land tenure insecurity of permit holders by making the land rights unclear until the enactment of regulation; and to be valid for a definite period of time by mandatorily demanding its conversion to lease system.

This Article offers a new perspective on the challenges of the modern American Indian land tenure system. While some property theorists have renewed focus on isolated aspects of Indian land tenure, including the historic inequities of colonial takings of Indian lands, this Article argues that the complexity of today’s federally imposed reservation property system does much of the same colonizing work that historic Indian land policies—from allotment to removal to termination—did overtly. But now, these inequities are largely overshadowed by the daunting complexity of the whole land tenure structure. This Article introduces a new taxonomy of complexity in American Indian land tenure and explores in particular how the recent trend of hypercategorizing property and sovereignty interests into ever-more granular and interacting jurisdictional variables has exacerbated development and self-governance challenges in Indian country. This structural complexity serves no adequate purpose for Indian landowners or Indian nations and, instead, creates perverse incentives to grow the federal oversight role. Complexity begets complexity, and this has created a self-perpetuating and inefficient cycle of federal control. Stepping back and reviewing Indian land tenure in its entirety—as a whole complex, dynamic, and ultimately adaptable system—allows the introduction of new, and potentially fruitful, management techniques borrowed from social and ecological sciences. Top-down Indian land reforms have consistently intensified complexity’s costs. This Article explores how emphasizing grassroots experimentation and local flexibility instead can create critical space for more radical, reservation-by-reservation transformations of local property systems into the future.

In Botswana, as in several other African countries with a similar historical experience, a dual or plural land tenure system was carried over from the colonial era. The bulk of the land falls within the category of “tribal land”. It is predominantly held and occupied by indigenous peoples under customary notions of land tenure. The State also holds as “State land” a fairly significant proportion which fell under the category of “Crown lands” during the colonial era. A tiny proportion now falls within the category of “freehold land”. This is predominantly held and occupied in conformity with common law notions and conceptions imported into the country with colonial rule. To some extent both State land and freehold land are held under or governed by “received law”, in contradistinction to tribal land which is largely held under customary law.In 1968, barely two years after independence, the Botswana parliament enacted legislation which attempted to reform customary land tenure by replacing existing customary or tribal institutions of land control and administration with statutory land boards. These started operating in 1970, and it soon became apparent from early assessments that even this limited and cautious programme of reform would not escape some of the problems associated with land transformation exercises elsewhere in Africa.

Land tenure is given attention in the general discussions on conservation and management of natural resources, but the necessary holistic approach to understand the linkages is less considered. Thus, we considered a watershed as a unit of reference and Integrated Watershed Management as a holistic land and water resources management approach with various roles and touchpoints with land tenure issues. To examine the role of land tenure on the management of natural resources in watersheds, we reviewed and compiled literature that captures watershed issues, integrating aspects of land tenure, and aiming to identify the key land tenure roles, dynamics, and its influences on integrated watershed management. Land tenure is observed playing various roles in watersheds and, thus, also on integrated watershed management as an approach—as a driver of change, influence for investment decisions, an incentive for adoption of practices, and leading to sustainability. Land tenure dynamics range from land tenure security, land tenure forms, land access and acquisition modalities, and how these aspects of land tenure relate with integrated watershed management.

In the rural and communal settings, land rights are culturally attached to indigenous peoples in Nigeria, especially the inhabitants of the southern part of the country. Culturally, the customary land tenure system has generic value and security in such ways that it could be transferred from one owner to owner without restrictions. Security of land tenure is a vital ingredient that enhances the transferability of greater altitudes of investment. The study adopted a random sampling method and selected 1,061 house-owners and administered a set of structured questionnaires that contained questions that probed into issues on their accessibility to land and legal security of tenure. Another set of questionnaires was differently designed to elicit information from other stakeholders (Land managers, Town planning Agencies, Community/Family Heads, etc). Data obtained from the primary source were subjected to empirical analysis. The data were also complemented by secondary data. The findings revealed the socio-economic characteristics of the house-owners, means and duration of the period of land acquisition, determinants of access to land, and the implications on the securing planning permission, construction of illegal structures and the quality of construction. Finally, the paper recommended that tenure security in customary areas can be enhanced through the formalization of customary tenure. Governments should facilitate this process, initially where there is a demand for formalization. There is a need to harmonize reform efforts across customary and statutory law, regulations. Keywords: Land, Access to Land, Security of Tenure, Statutory law, Customary law, Rural Land.

Customary land tenure is normally not based on codified or statutory sources, but stems from customary traditions and norms. When westernised courts have to interpret and adjudicate these customary traditions and norms, the normal rules of statutory interpretation cannot be followed. The court has to rely on evidence of the traditional values of land use to determine the rules connected to land tenure. Previously courts in many mixed jurisdictions relied on common or civil law legal principles to determine the nature of customary land tenure and lay down the principles to adjudicate customary land disputes among traditional communities, or between traditional and westernised communities in the same jurisdiction. Many examples of such westernised approach can be found in case law of Canada and South Africa. The interpretation of the nature of customary land tenure according to common law or civil law principles has been increasingly rejected by higher courts in South Africa and Canada, e.g. in Alexkor Ltd v The Richtersveld Community 2004 5 SA 469 (CC) and Delgamuukw v British Columbia 1997 3 SCR 1010. This paper explores the methodology the courts should follow to determine what the distinctive nature of customary land tenure is. As customary land tenure is not codified or based on legislation, the court has to rely, in addition to the evidence of indigenous peoples, on the expert evidence of anthropologists and sociologists in determining the nature of aboriginal title (in Canada) and indigenous land tenure (in South Africa). The court must approach the rules of evidence and interpret the evidence with a consciousness of the special nature of aboriginal claims and the evidentiary difficulties in proving a right which originates in times where there were no written records of the practices, customs and traditions engaged in. The court must not undervalue the evidence presented simply because that evidence does not conform precisely with the evidentiary standards that would be applied in, for example, a private law tort case.

This paper examines the potential significance of updating registration practices in resolving some of the issues about tenure security in a transformative context. It deals with the importance of good governance in the context of land administration and considers its impact on intended reforms. Land registration practice as an indicator of the quality of governance is scrutinised. The debate about the kinds of interests to be served by tenure security reforms is considered. A comparative law analysis demonstrates how demands for electronification, placed on registration systems, can reshape the process of securing tenure. The paper then highlights issues for further investigation and discussion.

AbstractTransforming a pluralistic tenure system into unified statutory rights has been a major objective of the development of property law in many developing countries. Many law and development scholars have assumed that unified land rights are a pre-condition to development and that a pluralistic tenure land system is a major source of uncertainty and insecurity. This article challenges this commonly held assumption by way of a case study of Indonesia's effort to unify the laws governing land. The author demonstrates that the unification of land law in Indonesia has not resulted in certainty and security of tenure. Instead, this process has been adversely affected by an imprecise private law system, and an inadequate administrative/public law system which has created even more forms of pluralism. The resultant effect of this process is the creation of multiple legal orders governing the current land affairs in Indonesia, such as a formal system, a customary system and a “semi-formal” system.

Thesis (LLD)--Stellenbosch University, 2000.
ENGLISH ABSTRACT: This dissertation is an attempt at reconciling the existing (and until recently predominant) private law concept of ownership and the property rights espoused by the new constitutional order. The attempts at land reform in South Africa and Germany are used as specifie examples of the manner in which the whole property law order in both these legal systems is developed through legislative and judicial initiative, on the basis of the constitutional provisions concerning property protection and regulation. The purpose of the investigation is to determine to what extent constitutional development of the private law of property will result in a property law order serving the socio-economic and political goals of economic growth and self-fulfilment and empowerment of the individual. Focus is placed on the influence of the constitutional protection and regulation of property as a mechanism for developing the private law of ownership in Germany and South Africa. In the first part of the exposition, the choice of legal comparison as course of inquiry is substantiated, and the terminological difficulties connected with an investigation into the development of the private law of property by the constitutional protection and regulation of property are discussed. Attention is given to the use of the terms "ownership" and "property" in the private law and in the constitutional context. The term "tenure" is also discussed in the context of land reform in South Africa. Further, the usc of terms such as "public interest", "common weal" and "public purposes" is discussed. The use of these terms are particularly complicated by the fact that each of them are often used in more than one sense, and that the use of these di fferent terms overlap to varying extents. The second part of the exposition contains information on the background of the constitutional property orders as they arc found in Germany and South Africa. The drafting histories of the South African and German constitutional property clauses indicate that in both these legal systems, the constitutional property clauses have hybrid ideological foundations. Both contain a compromise between, on the one hand, classical liberalism (which affords the holders of rights a high degree of individual freedom and autonomy) and, on the other hand, social democracy (which allow stronger regulatory measures, also upon private properly). Further, some of the structural aspects connected to constitutional protection and regulation of property in Germany and South Africa are discussed. The positively phrased property guarantee in art 14 GG is compared with the negatively phrased "guarantee" of s 25 Fe, whereby the transitional property guarantee in s 28 JC is also considered. Further, the basic structure and stages of an inquiry into the constitutional property clause are discussed, with reference to differences between the German and South African methods. These differences are not of such a nature that it excludes further comparison. Ilowever, it is necessary to keep the differences in the judicial system in mind when conducting a comparison of the present nature. Therefore, a brief overview of the judicial systems of Germany and South Africa is provided, with specific reference to the manner in which the courts resolved certain property questions. The principles underlying the constitutional orders of Germany and South Africa are also discussed with specific reference to their significance for the treatment of property issues. In particular, the meaning of the constitutional state (Rechtsstaat) and the social wei fare state (Sozialstaat) for the solution of problems connected to property is discussed. It is indicated that the legitimacy of the legal order in general and property law in particular, depends on the degree of success in the implementation of these values. Further, it is indicated that the implementation of these values also determines the importance of private property and/or regulation thereof in a specific legal system. In the third part of the exposition, the relevance of the constitutional protection and regulation for the private law of ownership is discussed. The expansion of the concept of property by the application of a "purely" constitutional definition thereof raises the question as to the continued relevance of the private law concept of ownership. This issue is discussed with reference to the protection of property in terms of the constitution in comparison with the scope of property in private law. It is indicated that the "exclusively constitutional" concept of property is by no means based only on Constitutional law. The role of the private law concept of ownership in a constitutional order is then elucidated. The discussion then turns to an analysis of the limitations on property endorsed by the constitutional order. Two main kinds of limitation are possible: (i) limitation of property through vertical operation of the constitution (ie a broad category of legislative and administrative deprivation (regulation), and a more specialised category, namely expropriations), and (ii) limitation through horizontal operation of the constitution (ie through the inroads allowed on property rights by the protection of other rights in the Bill of Rights). It is indicated that the application of the public interest / public purposes requirements are sometimes intended to protect individual interest above those of society in general. In other cases, the public interest / public purposes requirement is aimed at securing the interests of the society at large. Further, it is indicated that the purpose of constitutional "interference" in the area of private property law is to correct imbalances in the relations among private persons which are regarded by the law as "equals," even if they are not equal for all practical purposes. The fourth part of the exposition concentrates on the land reform programmes in Germany (after the reunification of 1990) and South Africa (since 1991) in order to analyse the attempts by the legislature and judiciary to give effect to the improved property order as anticipated by constitutional development of property. In both Germany and South Africa political changes made land reform programmes essential: In South Africa the land reform programme was introduced to reverse the injustices created by colonialism and apartheid. A tripartite programme is employed for this purpose. The new kinds of land rights created through this system of land reform are indicated. The manner in which this body of law is treated by the courts is also analysed with reference to its relevance for the development of Property Law in general. In Germany a property and land reform programme became necessary with the reunification. On the one hand, the socialist property order in the former GDR had to be replaced by the property order already existing in the FGR, and on the other hand the individual claims for restitution of the land and enterprises taken by the GDR state or its Soviet predecessor had to be balanced against the claims that present occupiers of such land have to it. The influence of legislation and litigation connected to these issues on the development of Property Law is discussed. The final part of the exposition is a summary of the conclusions drawn during the course of the analysis.
AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: In 'n poging om in hierdie uiteensetting die bestaande (en tot onlangs nog oorheersende) privaatregtelike begrip "eiendom" te versoen met die breër eiendomsbegrip wat deur die nuwe grondwetlike bestel gepropageer word, word die grondhervormingsprogramme in Suid Afrika en Duitsland gebruik as voorbeelde van die wyse waarop die bestaande Eiendomsreg in beide regsisteme deur die wetgewer en die howe ontwikkel word. Die doel van die ondersoek is om vas te stel tot watter mate die grondwetlike ontwikkeling van privaatregtelike Eiendomsreg sal bydra tot die totstandkoming van 'n eiendomsregtelike regsorde waarin die sosio-ekonomiese en politieke doelwitte van ekonomiese groei en die vrye ontwikkeling en bemagtiging van die individu gedien word. Die klem word geplaas op die grondwetlike beskerming en regulering van eiendom as 'n meganisme waardeur die privaatregtelike Eiendomsreg in Duitsland en Suid- Afrika ontwikkel kan word. Die eerste deel van die uiteensetting begrond die keuse van regsvergelying as metode van analise en bespreek die terminologiese probleme wat in 'n ondersoek na die grondwetlike ontwikkeling van die privaatregtelike eiendomsreg kan opduik. Aandag word gegee aan die gebruik van begrippe wat verband hou met eiendom en publieke belang in sowel die privaatreg as in die grondwetlike konteks. Die gebruik van verskillende terme, veral in Engels, kan problematies wees, en daarom word dit breedvoeriger bespreek. In die tweede deel van die uiteensetting word die agtergrond waarteen die grondwetlike bestelle van Duitsland en Suid-Afrika funksioneer, bespreek: Eers word die formulering van die eiendomsklousules in Suid-Afrika en Duitsland vanuit 'n historiese perspektief ondersoek. In beide regsisteme is die grondwetlike eiendomsklousules op 'n kompromis tussen verskillende ideologieë gebaseer. Enersyds op klassieke liberalisme, in terme waarvan eienaars en ander reghebbendes 'n hoë mate van individuele vryheid en outonomie toegeken word; andersyds op sosiaal-demokratiese denke, in terme waarvan strenger regulerende maatreëls (ook op privaat eiendom) geduld moet word. Dan word sommige van die strukturele aspekte verbonde aan die grondwetlike beskerming en regulering van eiendom in Duitsland en Suid-Afrika bespreek. Die positief geformuleerde eiendomswaarborg in art 14 GG word vergelyk met die negatiewe formulering in art 25 FG en die positiewe waarborg in art 28 lG. Verder word die basiese struktuur en fases van 'n grondwetlike ondersoek in die beskerming en regulering van eiendom bespreek, met spesifieke verwysing na die verskille in die Duitse en Suid-Afrikaanse benaderings. Hierdie verskille is nie van so 'n aard dat dit regsvergelyking kortwiek nie. Nogtans is dit noodsaaklik dat die benaderingsverskille in ag geneem word vir 'n meer diepgaande vergelyking. Daarom word 'n vlugtige oorsig oor die rol van die howe in die hantering van eiendomsvraagstukke in grondwetlike konteks verskaf. Verder word die beginsels onderliggend aan die grondwetlike bestelle in Duitsland en Suid-Afrika bespreek met spesifieke verwysing na die betekenis daarvan vir die beskerming en regulering van eiendom. Daar word veral klem gelê op die regstaat- en sosiaalstaatbeginsels. Die legitimi teit van die regsorde in die algemeen, en meer spesifiek die Eiendomsreg, hang af van die mate van sukses waarmee hierdie beginsels in die gemeenskap geïmplementeer word. Daar word verder aangedui dat die toepassing van hierdie beginsels die mate van individuele vryheid in die uitoefening van eiendomsreg en/of die graad van regulering van eiendomsreg in 'n bepaalde regstelsel bepaal. Die derde deel van die uiteensetting konsentreer op die betekenis van die grondwetlike beskerming en regulering van eiendom vir die privaatregtelike Eiendomsreg. Die uitgebreide eiendomsbegrip wat in die grondwetlike konteks aangewend word, gee aanleiding tot die vraag na die sin van 'n voortgesette enger eiendomsbegrip in die privaatreg. Hierdie kwessie word bespreek met verwysing na die beskerming van eiendom in terme van die grondwet, en word vergelyk met die omvang van die eiendomsbegrip in die privaatreg. Daar word aangedui dat die sogenaamde uitsluitlik grondwetlike eiendomsbegrip geensins eksklusief aan die Grondwetlike Reg is nie. Die rol van die privaatregtelike eiendomsbegrip in 'n grondwetlike bestel word vervolgens uiteengesit. Verder word die beperkings op eiendom in die grondwetlike konteks geanaliseer. In beginsel is twee soorte beperkings regverdigbaar: (i) Beperking van eiendomsreg deur die vertikale aanwending van die grondwet, dit wil sê deur die breër kategorie wetgewende en administratiewe ontnemings (regulerings) van eiendomsreg en deur 'n enger en meer spesifieke kategorie, naamlik onteiening; en (ii) beperking van eiendomsreg deur horisontale aanwending van die grondwet, dit wil sê deur die inbreuk op eiendomsregte wat toegelaat word as gevolg van die uitwerking van die beskerming van ander regte in die Handves vir Menseregte. Daar word aangedui dat die vereiste van publieke belang in twee teenoorstaande opsigte gebruik word: Enersyds om die individuele belang bo dié van die gemeenskap te stel, en andersyds om die gemeenskap se belange as sulks te beskerm. Daar word ook aangedui dat grondwetlike "inmenging" met privaatregtelike eiendomsreg daarop gemik is om ongebalanseerdhede in die regsverhoudings tussen persone wat deur die reg as "gelykes" bejeën word en in effek nie gelyk is nie, uit te skakel. In die vierde deel van die uiteensetting word die grondhervormingsprogramrne in Duitsland (sedert hervereniging in 1990) en Suid-Afrika (sedert 1991) bespreek. Die klem val op die pogings van die wetgewer en howe om die verbeterde eiendomsbestel, soos wat dit in die grondwet in die vooruitsig gestel word, te konkretiseer. In beide regstelsels het politieke veranderinge 'n grondhervormingsprogram onontbeerlik gemaak: Die grondhervormingsprogram in Suid-Afrika het ten doelom die ongeregtighede in die grondbesitstelsel wat ontstaan het as gevolg van kolonialisme en apartheid uit te skakel. Vir dié doel berus die grondhervormingsprogram op drie verwante, maar uiteenlopende, beginsels. Die nuwe vorme van grondregte wat uit hierdie sisteem ontstaan, word aangedui, en die wyse waarop hierdie deel van die reg deur die howe hanteer word, word bespreek met verwysing na die betekenis daarvan vir die ontwikkeling van die Eiendomsreg. In Duitsland is die noodwendigheid van 'n grondhervormingsprogram aan die hervereniging van die DDR en die BRD gekoppel. Die sosialisties-georienteerde eiendomsbestel wat in die "oostelike" deel van Duitsland aanwending gevind het, moes vervang word deur die bestel wat reeds in die "westelike" deel van die "nuwe" staat in werking was. Verder moet die grondeise van persone wat grond of besigheidseiendom verloor het gedurende die sosialistiese regeringstyd en die voorafgaande Sowjetiese besetting, opgeweeg word teen die aansprake wat huidige besitters op sulke grond het. Die invloed van wetgewing en regspraak hieroor op die Eiendomsreg word geanaliseer. Die laaste deel van die uiteensetting bevat 'n samevatting van die gevolgtrekkings wat deur die loop van die analise gemaak is.

A land tenure system is a set of rules which govern social relations between peoples in respect to land. It defines the property rights in land of individuals or groups in a specific locality or society. The property rights, which are in effect bundles of rights, may include the right to use, lease, mortgage, transfer, and so on. The source of these tenurial rules can be either customs or enacted laws. This thesis examines in detail these aspects of land tenure systems in respect to Eritrea, a country situated in the Horn of East Africa. Accordingly, the indigenous systems of land tenure of the country, land reforms introduced by the country's colonizers, and land laws enacted by the country's Government after independence, are discussed and criticized.

The present enquiry is a study of specific social possibilities in a culture-contact situation, namely the encounter of the Dene and Inuit of the Northwest Territories with Canadian society; and shows how by analyzing the basic content of two traditions in contact with one another, the possibilities for mutual adjustment of one tradition to the other, or the lack of such possibilities, may be logically derived from that content. The study also uses the perspective of cultural ecology to devise and demonstrate a way in which any system of land-tenure may be compared with any other, without the concepts of one system being imposed upon the other. The particular problem of the enquiry is to compare the traditional ideas of land and land-tenure among Dene and Inuit with the ideas of land and land-tenure in Canadian law; and to discover a way whereby the Dene and Inuit may use the concepts of the dominant Canadian system to preserve their own traditional ways of holding land. The analysis begins by outlining the cultural ecosystem of each people, their basic modes of subsistence, the resources used, the kinds of technical operations applied to those resources, the work organization, and relevant parts of social organization and world-view. Then, in order, the idea of land which the people appear to be following, the kinds of land-rights and principles of land-holding recognized by the" people, and the kinds of "persons" who may hold land-rights, are described. The systems are then compared in order to discover the possibilities for "reconciliation". The enquiry concludes that the basic premises and characters of the Dene and Inuit systems of land-tenure are fundamentally irreconcilable with those of Canadian real property law, but that the Dene and Inuit systems can be encapsulated within the dominant Canadian system by means of the Community Land-Holding Corporation (CLHC). The CLHC as proposed in this enquiry would allow the members of a community to hold land among themselves according to their own rules, while the corporation holds the land of the whole community against outsiders according to the principles of Canadian law.
Arts, Faculty of
Anthropology, Department of
Graduate

Thesis (LLM (Private Law))--University of Stellenbosch, 2009.
ENGLISH ABSTRACT: In this thesis, the Communal Land Rights Act 11 0f 2004 is analysed in order to determine whether it can give effect to the constitutional mandate in terms of which it was promulgated, namely section 25(5), (6) and (9) of the Constitution. Land policy pertaining to land tenure reform is discussed to see how and to what extent it finds application in the Act. The time-consuming process pertaining to the registration of the community rules is investigated, and the implications where a community fails to adhere to this peremptory provision in the Act are explained. The thesis also analyses and discusses the functions of statutorily created institutions, like the land administration committee and the land rights boards, in the efficient management of land in rural areas. The aforementioned land administration committee is particularly problematic, since the Act provides that in cases where a recognised tribal authority exist, that institution “may” be considered as the land administration committee, subject to prescribed composition requirements as contained in the Act. The Traditional Leadership and Governance Framework Act will also be discussed since it intersects with the Communal Land Rights Act in this regard. The pending constitutional challenge which relates to this potentially problematic issue, will be discussed. The constitutional challenge of the Act by four communities’ is explored in order to indicate just how potentially problematic the institution of traditional leadership could be. vi This study also discusses and analyses the compromise contained in the Act, regarding the registration of the land title of a community and the registration of “new order rights” in the name of individuals. In this context the impact of this process on the efficacy on the current Deeds registration system is investigated. The Ministerial determination and its constitutional implications is yet another issue, examined in this study. All of these issues will have a negative impact on the implementation of the Communal Land Rights Act and especially on achieving tenure security.
AFRIKAANS OPSOMMING: In hierdie tesis word die Wet op Kommunale Grondregte 11 van 2004 geanaliseer om te bepaal of dit inderdaad voldoen aan die grondwetlike mandaat soos voorsien in art 25(5), (6) en (9) van die Grondwet. Die beleid van toepassing op grondbeheerhervorming word bespreek om te bepaal tot watter mate dit wel in die Wet aanwending vind. Die tydrowende prosedure van die registrasie van gemeenskapsreëls word ondersoek, asook die implikasies indien ‘n gemeenskap nie aan die voorskriftelike bepaling voldoen nie. Die tesis bespreek en evalueer ook die funksies van die twee instellings wat statutêr geskep is, naamlik grond administrasie komitees en grondregte rade. Die twee instellings is geskep met die doel om van hulp te wees in die effektiewe administrasie van grond in die kommunale areas. Dit is veral die grond administrasie komitee wat problematies is, omdat die Wet op Kommunale Grondregte bepaal dat waar ‘n gemeenskap ‘n erkende tradisionele owerheid het, hierdie owerheid beskou sal word as die grond administrasie komitee van daardie spesifieke gemeenskap. In hierdie konteks is ‘n bespreking van die Wet op Tradisionele Leierskap en Regeringsraamwerk, noodsaaklik. Die betwiste grondwetlike kwessie wat tot op hede nog onbeslis is wat hiermee verband hou, sal ook bespreek word. ‘n Kort uiteensetting word gedoen van die vier gemeenskappe wat die Wet op grondwetlik gronde aanveg om presies te probeer aantoon hoe problematies die instelling van tradisionele leierskap is. Hierdie studie bespreek en analiseer verder ook die kompromis wat getref is tussen registrasie van die titelakte in die naam van ‘n gemeenskap en die viii registrasie van sogenaamde “nuwe orde regte” in die naam van individue. Die impak van hierdie magdom registrasies op die bestaande registrasiesisteem word ook oorweeg. Die grondwetlikheid van die ministeriële besluitnemingsbevoegdheid word breedvoerig bespreek in hierdie studie. Al hierdie genoemde kwessies mag nadelige impak hê op die implementering van die Wet op Kommunale Grondregte en spesifiek ook op grondbeheerhervorming.

The paper outlines the historical development of Kenyan land tenure reform in relation to a group of smallholders in Maragoli. The transformation of common property into private property has not completely destroyed the authority of local institutions in matters of land tenure and land use. Customary social obligations have continued to play a role in the decision-making process of smallholders in Maragoli. The government in Kenya continues to be uninformed by the socioeconomic realities that affect smallholders. Agrarian law and administration should be built on the kinds of agricultural systems that are being practiced by the majority of the population in Kenya.

AbstractMany land tenure situations are not necessarily defined and adjudicated by governments, that is, at a statutory level. In some cases, these may be defined by a local community and be upheld and resolved locally. This chapter reviews how de jure land rights (those defined by law) and de facto land rights (the “on the ground” and sometimes implicit rights or management activities, sometimes referred to as customary or traditional rights) differ. We examine how land tenure insecurity can plague both these cases and argue that making de jure and de facto situations congruent is necessary for a path toward a more sustainable future.

AbstractLegal control of land as well as legal and social recognition of women’s uses of and rights to land can have catalytic effects of empowerment, increasing women’s influence and status in their communities. During past decades, changes in the Chinese land tenure rights and practices have brought important incentives for rural developments including farmer income and living standards. However, the law in books differs from the law in action and the lack of women’s land use rights recognition deprives them of their chances of surviving in rural China. They become legally invisible, ignored and forgotten. This qualitative research is mainly based on interviews conducted in China. The data will be analysed within the framework of theories and philosophies grounding Chinese ideology. As this research focus on women in rural areas, feminism form the theoretical and ideological background.

Some initiatives were established at international level in order to attain sustainable development in the mining sector, which is being discussed worldwide starting 1980s. The concept of sustainable development is defined as a development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the future generation’s ability to meet their own needs. The law of sustainable development is a cross-sectored system of legal thinking that was evaluated by the national and international economic law, environmental law and human rights law. In the reforms of mining law, which have been realized after 1990s, the sustainable development is used a focus concept. The mining codes were enacted under the influence of having provisions related to security of tenure, establishment of transparent mining administration, access to mining land, and competitive-fair fiscal regime. In this paper, sustainable development is defined as a concept and its legal dimensions are explained. The mining reforms, which is being considered in the context of the sustainable development, are examined and a resolution that offers view of de lege ferenda is proposed. In addition, the related regulations and practices in the current Turkish and Kazakh Mining Laws are also included.

Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) is an international initiative to mitigate climate change in the forest sector. It is intended to incentivize developing countries to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from deforestation and forest degradation, as well as promote sustainable management of forests, and conservation and enhancement of forest carbon stocks. REDD+ has significant implications for land and resource rights, and raises particular concerns for women. These concerns arise from discrimination that women already face in resource management processes, largely due to unclear, unsecure and unequal tenure rights. Women represent a large percentage of the world’s poor, and they are often directly dependent on natural resources. As a result, there are significant risks that REDD+ could exacerbate existing inequalities for women if it fails to respect women’s tenure rights. This paper makes a case for advancing women’s tenure rights and how international law can be used to promote those rights in the context of REDD+.