Kwanini migogoro ya ardhi haimaliziki au kupungua, tatizo ni sheria, watendaji au wananchi?

mpimamstaafu

JF-Expert Member
Jul 18, 2018
4,445
4,704
Wadau hakika Migogoro ya Ardhi nchini imekuwa ni kero kubwa.Nimekuwa najiuliza hivi tatizo linalofanya Migogoro hii isimalizike au kupungua nini? Je tatizo ni Sheria zilizopo, Watendaji wa sekta ya Ardhi au Wananchi?
 
Wadau hakika Migogoro ya Ardhi nchini imekuwa ni kero kubwa.Nimekuwa najiuliza hivi tatizo linalofanya Migogoro hii isimalizike au kupungua nini? Je tatizo ni Sheria zilizopo, Watendaji wa sekta ya Ardhi au Wananchi?
Tatizo hapo serikali haijamuangalia mtu wa chini ambaye Ardhi imemuajiri. Serikali ingemjali mtu wa chini ingelikwisha Pima Ardhi yote na kuweka mpango bora wa matumizi ya Ardhi.

Sent using Jamii Forums mobile app
 
Hayo matatizo yanakosa utatuzi hasa kwa kuzuia vyombo vya habari kuripoti. Rais alipoingia madarakani aliwahi kuonya vyombo vya habari kutokutoa habari hizo bali watangaze za maendeleo tu. Matokeo yake watendaji wamatake advantage ya kutoshughulikia hiyo migogoro. Namsihi rais aache matatizo yaanikwe ili yaonekana, kinyume na hapo atapewa taarifa za uongo na watendaji wake.
 
Wadau hakika Migogoro ya Ardhi nchini imekuwa ni kero kubwa.Nimekuwa najiuliza hivi tatizo linalofanya Migogoro hii isimalizike au kupungua nini? Je tatizo ni Sheria zilizopo, Watendaji wa sekta ya Ardhi au Wananchi?
As long as Hon. Lukuvi has retained the same mass of old corrupt staff, the problem will persist! Wanatamba kuwa amekuja idara ya ardhi ataiacha kama alivyoikuta! cc Hon. Lukuvi
 
Ardhi ni rasilimali kuu katika uzalishaji yaani ni major means of production.

Huwezi kuzalisha chochote bila ardhi, kwa hiyo kila mtu anahangaika kila namna kuipata.

Kwa hiyo, demand ya ardhi ni kubwa, na kwa hiyo mbinu nyingi zinatumika ili kuipata, na hili ndilo hupelekea migogoro.

Chanzo kikuu ni uhitaji mkubwa wa ardhi.

Sheria za ardhi, mahakama na baadhi ya wanasiasa pia wamekuwa ni moja ya vyanzo vya migogoro.

Sheria zipo ila bado zina migongano ya hapa na pale.

Mfano, Sheria ya Ardhi inapingana na Sheria ya Ardhi ya Kijiji.

Sheria ya ardhi inasema hati ya kimila na hati miliki, yaani Customary right of occupancy na granted right of occupancy zina Hadhi sawa, ila Sheria ya Ardhi inasema pia kuwa, kama ikitokea mkanganyiko kati ya Sheria ya Ardhi na ile ya Kijiji, basi, Sheria ya Ardhi ndiyo itakuwa sahihi, yaani shall prevail.

Maana yake ni kwamba, Sheria ya Ardhi inakandamiza hati ya kimila inayotajwa katika Sheria ya Ardhi ya Kijiji.

Pia, sheria ya Ardhi kifungu cha 20 ikisomwa na Sheria ya uwekezaji, zinaruhusu mgeni asiye RAIA kumiliki Ardhi kwa kigezo cha mwekezaji.
 
Sheria ya ardhi inasema hati ya kimila na hati miliki, yaani Customary right of occupancy na granted right of occupancy zina Hadhi sawa, ila Sheria ya Ardhi inasema pia kuwa, kama ikitokea mkanganyiko kati ya Sheria ya Ardhi na ile ya Kijiji, basi, Sheria ya Ardhi ndiyo itakuwa sahihi, yaani shall prevail.
Naomba kifungu hicho please!
 
As long as Hon. Lukuvi has retained the same mass of old corrupt staff, the problem will persist! Wanatamba kuwa amekuja idara ya ardhi ataiacha kama alivyoikuta! cc Hon. Lukuvi
Rushwa ni tatizo kubwa mpaka leo, mie kuna jamaa yangu kasafiri kamuachia binamu yake funguo nyumbani kwake

Kwanini asichukue offer yake ya kiwanja, kaenda kutengeneza kitambulisho cha kupigia kura na sura ya mdogo wake (inaonekana hiki kinapatikana kirahisi), kaenda ardhi katengeneza hati kamili (lazima kuna mtu anamjua huko ndani); baada ya hapo yeye na mdogo wake wakaenda kuchukua mkopo wa hela mbuzi kweli kweli. Sasa si mgogoro mwingine huo mahakama ya ardhi

Lakini hii nchi kuna watendaji wa serikari wanamatatizo sijapata ona
 
Rushwa ni tatizo kubwa mpaka leo, mie kuna jamaa yangu kasafiri kamuachia binamu yake funguo nyumbani kwake

Kwanini asichukue offer yake ya kiwanja, kaenda kutengeneza kitambulisho cha kupigia kura na sura ya mdogo wake (inaonekana hiki kinapatikana kirahisi), kaenda ardhi katengeneza hati kamili (lazima kuna mtu anamjua huko ndani); baada ya hapo yeye na mdogo wake wakaenda kuchukua mkopo wa hela mbuzi kweli kweli. Sasa si mgogoro mwingine huo mahakama ya ardhi

Lakini hii nchi kuna watendaji wa serikari wanamatatizo sijapata ona
Hiyo ni wazi kuna mtu anamfahamu! Kuna taarifa zote land registry, sasa alipenyaje kote humo bila kushutukiwa? Kuna mtu mshenzi idara ya ardhi alifanikisha uchafyu huo. and it is easy to trace the culprit!
 
Hiyo ni wazi kuna mtu anamfahamu! Kuna taarifa zote land registry, sasa alipenyaje kote humo bila kushutukiwa? Kuna mtu mshenzi idara ya ardhi alifanikisha uchafyu huo. and it is easy to trace the culprit!
Ndio na mi naona rushwa bado ni tatizo ardhi na kuna watendaji serikarini wanamatatizo sana
 
Major means of production ni ardhi,so everyone is struggling to get land while also,there is increase of population na ardhi ni ileile haiongezeki
 
SIASA ni jambo la kwanza. Alipita Lukuvi "kutatua" migogoro nchi nzima lakini kilichofanyika ni kurutubisha migogoro iliyopo kama Iran wafanyavyo kwenye uranium kwa ajili ya kuunda nuclear.
RUSHWA kwenye registry za ardhi imegeuka kama suala la kawaida kabisa katika utendaji na maofisa ardhi wengi sasa rushwa ni haki yao kabisa na wanayo exception kwenye sheria za nchi linapokuja suala la rushwa, imezoeleka kifupi. Ukisikia ofisa ardhi suala linalokuja akilini mara moja ni upigaji.
TATU wizara ya ardhi ni wizara iliyosahaulika sana kwenye suala zima la rasilimali Watu na rasilimali zingine, hasa upande wa waamuzi/wenyeviti wa mabaraza ya ardhi na nyumba ya wilaya. Hii ni sehemu MUHIMU SANA katika kupunguza au kumaliza kabisa migogoro ya ardhi. Wilaya nyingi sana hazina watu hawa na kwingineko mkoa mzima unamkuta MMOJA tu anazungukia wilaya zote! (Kama Ruvuma nilipokuwa majuzi). Huwezi tegemea ufanisi hapo. Mambo mengi sana yanayohitaji udharura wa kimaamuzi yanakwama na kubadili sura ya migogoro na kwingineko wanauana na kutiana vilema. Hili la tatu ambalo ni muhimu sana lina uwezo wa kupunguza migogoro ya ardhi kwa zaidi ya asilimia 70 likitendewa kazi.

Sent using Jamii Forums mobile app
 
Naomba kifungu hicho please!


Kifungu cha 20 cha Sheria ya Ardhi namba 113 iliyorekebishwa 2013, kinasema "mtu ambaye si raia hawezi kupewa Ardhi isipokuwa kama ni kwa lengo la uwekezaji chini ya Sheria ya uwekezaji. Pia soma kifungu cha 25 na 32, kwa pamoja vinazungumzia kipindi cha kumilikishwa Ardhi ambapo nimiaka 99.

Kifungu cha 181 cha Sheria ya Ardhi inasema kuwa Sheria nyingine ya Ardhi, inayokinzana na Sheria hii, haitatumika.

Hapa kwa maneno mengine ni kwamba Sheria ya Ardhi ya Kijiji, ambayo kimsingi ni mpinzani was Sheria ya Ardhi namba 113 niliyoitaja hapo, haina nguvu.

Maana yake ni kwamba, akija mtu anahitaji kumilikishwa Ardhi, yule mwenye hati ya kimila hana sauti na anapokonywa na kupewa yule anayehitaji hati ya kiserikali.

Na hili linafanyika, watu wanabomolewa kupisha mwenye mtaji.

Pia, mtu mwenye hati miliki hawezi kupokonywa ardhi halafu ikamililiwa kimila.
 
Kifungu cha 20 cha Sheria ya Ardhi namba 113 iliyorekebishwa 2013, kinasema "mtu ambaye si raia hawezi kupewa Ardhi isipokuwa kama ni kwa lengo la uwekezaji chini ya Sheria ya uwekezaji. Pia soma kifungu cha 25 na 32, kwa pamoja vinazungumzia kipindi cha kumilikishwa Ardhi ambapo nimiaka 99.

Kifungu cha 181 cha Sheria ya Ardhi inasema kuwa Sheria nyingine ya Ardhi, inayokinzana na Sheria hii, haitatumika.

Hapa kwa maneno mengine ni kwamba Sheria ya Ardhi ya Kijiji, ambayo kimsingi ni mpinzani was Sheria ya Ardhi namba 113 niliyoitaja hapo, haina nguvu.

Maana yake ni kwamba, akija mtu anahitaji kumilikishwa Ardhi, yule mwenye hati ya kimila hana sauti na anapokonywa na kupewa yule anayehitaji hati ya kiserikali.

Na hili linafanyika, watu wanabomolewa kupisha mwenye mtaji.

Pia, mtu mwenye hati miliki hawezi kupokonywa ardhi halafu ikamililiwa kimila.
NEVER!
soma hii kutoka fb attorneys!
Change of right of occupancy​
My farm is located in Maghanga village, Mbulu District, and has a customary right of occupancy which was obtained after we executed an agreement with the village council in 1997. The area is not surveyed because it is still remote from the district area. To enable me effectively secure my right of occupancy should I change my customary right of occupancy to a certificate of title? What process should I follow to enable this change?
GP, Mbulu
There are two kinds of right of occupancies namely the granted right of occupancy and the customary right of occupancy (deemed right of occupancy). The deemed right of occupancy is granted by the Village Council because all of the village land is vested under the Village Council.
It must be noted that under the eyes of the law, both rights of occupancies have equal status and neither is better or superior to the other. Bearing the equal status of the two in mind, there is no need for you to change your customary right of occupancy to a granted right of occupancy. You also cannot own a granted right of occupancy in an area which is under the village council.
Should the President transfer the village land to general land for public interest, the occupiers will be paid compensation for unexhausted improvements equal to the compensation that would have been paid when general land is acquired by the government for public interest.

If the land is transferred to general land under the order of the President and the occupiers are permitted to continue with occupation of the land, you can then apply for the granted right of occupancy on the said land because it will no longer be under the village council.
Previously the Village Council did not issue certificates to owners of the customary right of occupancy but recently owners of customary right of occupancy can acquire certificates of title from the village council. You may want to apply for this certificate.



In the case of Attorney General v Lohay Akonaay and Joseph Lohay[14] the respondents, father and son, had acquired land rights under customary law recognized as deemed rights of occupancy under section 2 of the Land Ordinance (Cap.113) over 20 acres in Mbulu District, Arusha Region, which they had cleared in 1943. They occupied and used the land until they were dispossessed during 'Operation Vijiji' under the Villages and Ujamaa Villages Act, 1975. They successefully sued for the recovery of that land and regained possession of it in 1990 under a Court decree. An appeal against that judgment was still pending in High Court when the Regulation of Land Tenure (Established Villages) Act, 1992, was passed. The effect of this Act was to extinguish customary rights in land acquired before 'operation Vijiji' in 'an established village', to prohibit the right to compensation for such extinction, to oust the jurisdiction of the courts, terminate relevant court proceedings and prohibit the enforcement of any relevant court decision. Proceedings under the 1992 Act were to be instituted only in local land tribunals. The respondents then petitioned the High Court alleging breaches of their fundamental rights and obtained a declaration from the High Court that the 1992 Act was invalid for inconsistency with the Constitution in that its provisions violated the petitioners' rights of equality before the law, of freedom from deprivation of property without fair compensation, and of access to the courts to protect their rights.
The Court ordered the offending Act to be struck out of the statute book. The Attorney General appealed to the Court of Appeal on the grounds that these holdings were erroneous, that customary land rights were not forms of property protected by the Constitution and that although certain sections of the 1992 Act violated the Constitution the whole Act could not be invalidated on that ground alone.
The Court said that “the historical background shows that the overriding legal concern of the British authorities, no doubt under the influence of the Mandate of the League of Nations and subsequently of the Trusteeship Council, with regard to land, was to safeguard, protect, and not to derogate from, the rights in land of the indigenous inhabitants. This is apparent in the Preamble to what was then known as the Land Tenure Ordinance, Cap 113 which came into force on 26 January, 1923. The Preamble reads:
'Whereas it is expedient that the existing customary rights of the natives of the Tanganyika Territory to use and enjoy the land of the Territory and the natural fruits thereof in sufficient quantity to enable them to provide for the sustenance of themselves their families and their posterity should be assured, protected and preserved;
And whereas it is expedient that the rights and obligations of the Government in regard to the whole of the lands within the Territory and also the rights and obligations of cultivators or other persons claiming to have an interest in such lands should be defined by law. Be it therefore enacted by the Governor and Commander-in-Chief of the Tanganyika Territory as follows....' ”

The Court of Appeal held inter alia that;
customary or deemed rights in land, though by their nature are nothing but rights to occupy and use the land, are nevertheless real property protected by the provisions of art 24 of the Constitution. It follows therefore that deprivation of a customary or deemed right of occupancy without fair compensation is prohibited by the Constitution. The prohibition of course extends to a granted right of occupancy. What is fair compensation depends on the circumstances of each case. In some cases a reallocation of land may be fair compensation.Fair compensation however is not confined to what is known in law as unexhausted improvements. Obviously where there are unexhausted improvements, the constitution as well as the ordinary land law requires fair compensation to be paid for its deprivation. Where there are no unexhausted improvements, but some effort has been put into the land by the occupier, that occupier is entitled to protection under Article 24(2) of the Constitution and fair compensation is payable for deprivation of property…the section of the law that purported to exclude access to the courts was unconstitutional.
Generally, both Customary Right of occupancy and Granted Right of Occupancy are considered the same by the law, this can be proved by the provision as per section 18(1) of the Village Land Act no 5 cap 114 of 1999, which provide that, customary right of occupancy have all respect the same as granted right of occupancy.

 
Watendaji.
Mie nahisi tatizo lipo kwenye Sheria za Ardhi na Watendaji.Nikizungumzia watendaji ni pale watendaji wanapokaa kituo kimoja cha kazi kwa muda mrefu mpaka wanawafahamu wamiliki wa ardhi kwa undani na matapeli wa ardhi na kutengeneza mahusiano.Nakumbuka 2010 Mh.Lukuvi akiwa Rc wa Dar aliwahamisha watendaji wa Sekta ya Ardhi na kuwatawanya mikoani na wengine kuwafukuza kazi, na kuleta watendaji kutoka mikoani na ilisaidia kupunguza migogoro ya ardhi mkoani Dar japo imeanza upya. Hivyo Watendaji wasikae kituo kimoja zaidi ya miaka 5.

Sent using Jamii Forums mobile app
 
Watendaji.
Mie nahisi tatizo lipo kwenye Sheria za Ardhi na Watendaji.Nikizungumzia watendaji ni pale watendaji wanapokaa kituo kimoja cha kazi kwa muda mrefu mpaka wanawafahamu wamiliki wa ardhi kwa undani na matapeli wa ardhi na kutengeneza mahusiano.Nakumbuka 2010 Mh.Lukuvi akiwa Rc wa Dar aliwahamisha watendaji wa Sekta ya Ardhi na kuwatawanya mikoani na wengine kuwafukuza kazi, na kuleta watendaji kutoka mikoani na ilisaidia kupunguza migogoro ya ardhi mkoani Dar japo imeanza upya. Hivyo Watendaji wasikae kituo kimoja zaidi ya miaka 5.

Sent using Jamii Forums mobile app
 
Back
Top Bottom