Loliondo, OBC, Dowans: The disturbing connection and secrets

[Next Level]

Tatizo lipo kaka, tena kubwa tu na tukiliendekeza kila mtu atakuja kukodisha maeneo ya uwekezaji hapa nchini, atakuja mtu na pesa yake akodishe kigamboni na afunge mitambo yake ya mawasiliano, mwingine akodishe zanzibar, mwingine mbeya, arusha, kilimanjanro, dodoma, dar, etc mbona itakuwa fujo? akija mwenye dau kubwa atakodisha tanzania yote. Nakumbuka enzi ile Iddi Amin alitaka kukodisha Kagera unajua kilicho mpata? Tukiindekeza hii tabia tutauza utu na heshima yetu.
Hii ni aibu kwetu na kwa taifa.

MM.......Narudia tena......tatizo ni hizo sera, makubaliano na mikataba mibovu ya uwekezaji. Hayo yanayotokea on the groung ni matokea tu.....kama tunataka kupiga kelele tuzipigiea sera na mikataba mibovu!

Tatizo ni kubwa wewe Next level mwenyewe you are problem!

Kwa kuwa na kwambia chanzo cha tatizo mkuu? ni vizuri kutokomeza chanzo cha ugonjwa kuliko kutibu ugonjwa

Ni kawaida ya watu wa sisiemu ndivyo mlivyo!!

Acha uvivu mkuu, fanya utafiti kidogo tu tena hapa hapa jamvini, then u will know where I belong!

 

[Nemesis]

Rais alipoingia madarakani aliapa kulinda ardhi yote ya Tanzania. Suala la ardhi ya Tz ni la kikatiba na Rais anawajibika kikatiba kuhakikisha kwamba hakuna hata nukta moja inaporwa au kuwa nchi nyingine kwa namna yeyote.

Kama hao waarabu wameita hiyo sehemu ni yao na wamekamata hata anga (mawasiliano), wanamawasiliano ya satellite ambayo huenda Mamlaka ya Mawasiliano haina control litakuwa ni jambo la hatari.

Tena ktk ulimwengu huu wenye teknologia ya hali ya juu, wanaweza hata wakawa wanaingia kwa ndege zao na kutoka bila control ya uhamiaji. Wanaweza kubeba na kuleta wanachotaka huki wenye nchi tukiwa gizani. Maybe tunanafuu kwamba waarabu bado wapo nyuma kiteknologia. Ingwkuwa na Israel wanandege zisizoonekana kwenye rada.

 

[Ramthods]

Hivi wangapi wanajua msemo huu...?

"Mali ya mjinga huliwa na mwerevu"

Nadhani wengi wetu hatuujui huu msemo, au maana yake!

Siku zote, mjinga hawezi kumiliki kitu katikati ya kundi la waerevu. Anachosema Next Level ndio kiini cha matatizo. Ujinga wetu umetuponza!

 

[Sokwe Mjanja]

Anyway sioni hapo tatizo lipo wapi, kwa sababu umesemea hayo maneno na mabango unayapata mara uingiapo kny eneo lililo uzwa (nafikiri hata hili si kweli, ukweli unatakuwa lililokodishwa-leased). Kama ni kweli, wakazi wa eneo hilo, na watumiaji wa eneo hilo ni hao waarabu wa UAE, so watakuwa wameweka mitambo ya mawasiliano ambayo inaweza kuwaunganisha wao na nyumbani kwao UAE!

Baada ya kuisha lease yao na kama serikali haitataka kurenew, basi hao jamaa itabidi waachie eneo warudi zao UAE!

Kwa uelewa wangu set ups za aina hii ni common sana sehemu za migodi, mashamba makubwa, vitaru vya utalii (kama kule Grumeti Hotels Serengeti) etc

Can't see a problem here, labda tatizo kama hiyo mitambo yao inawaathiri wananchi wanaoyazunguka hayo maeneo. Vinginevyo tatizo kuu litakuwa lile kuruhusu ubinafsishwaji wa rasilimali za taifa, kama hatukuwa tayari kufanya hivyo, vinginevyo kama umekubali kubinafsisha rasirimali, lazima ukubali pia hao wawekezaji wanapotumia rasirimali hizo kutokana na mikataba tuliyosainiana!

Ni mgodi gani mkuu umekwenda ukaona huu ujinga?

 

[Next Level]

Hivi wangapi wanajua msemo huu...?

"Mali ya mjinga huliwa na mwerevu"

Nadhani wengi wetu hatuujui huu msemo, au maana yake!

Siku zote, mjinga hawezi kumiliki kitu katikati ya kundi la waerevu. Anachosema Next Level ndio kiini cha matatizo. Ujinga wetu umetuponza!

Kula tano Rathmods! Nilifikiri sitaeleweka kwa wanajamvi wote.....! watu wanazunguka sana, na kulaumu ugonjwa uliopo baadala ya kuangalia chanzo cha ugonjwa na kutokomeza kabisa!

 

[Next Level]

Ni mgodi gani mkuu umekwenda ukaona huu ujinga?

Mkuu imekutisha hilo la set ups? basi ninaweza sema migodi yote hapa Tanzania kuna upuuzi mkubwa sana wa kuwadhalilisha locals, kuna racial discrimination ya hali ya juu sana, kuna wizi wa rasilimali sana! Just tembelea mgodi wowote Tanzania ambao uko chini foreigners mkuu....hali ni mbaya sana!

 

[Ramthods]

Kula tano Rathmods! Nilifikiri sitaeleweka kwa wanajamvi wote.....! watu wanazunguka sana, na kulaumu ugonjwa uliopo baadala ya kuangalia chanzo cha ugonjwa na kutokomeza kabisa!

Tatizo letu watanzania ni dogo sana ... "ubinafsi".

Siku ubinafsi ukiondoka, haya mambo yote ya ufisadi na mikataba ovyo .. yoote yataisha!

 

[BAK]

Wanaharakati wafichua uozo Loliondo​

​

​

na Betty Kangonga
Tanzania Daima~Sauti ya Watu

MUUNGANO wa Asasi za Kiraia (FemAct) na mitandao ya wafugaji, kwa pamoja wameitaka serikali kusimamisha operesheni ya kuhamisha wafugaji wilayani Loliondo na sehemu nyingine, kwa ukiukwaji mkubwa wa haki za binadamu.

Wakitoa tamko hilo mbele ya waandishi wa habari katika mkutano uliofanyika jana, Makao Makuu ya Mtandao wa Jinsia nchini, (TGNP), Mwenyekiti wa muungano huo, Jesca Mkuchu alisema kitendo cha kuwahamisha wafugaji kwa kutumia vyombo vya dola, ni ukiukwaji mkubwa wa haki za binadamu.

“Kitendo cha kuhamisha wafugaji katika Wilaya ya Ngorongoro, Tarafa ya Loliondo, ni ukiukwaji mkubwa wa haki za binadamu, haki za raia na uvunjaji wa sheria na katiba, ambapo vyombo vya dola vinafanya hivyo kwa maslahi ya kuipendelea Kampuni ya Ortello Business Corporation,” alisema Mkuchu.

Naye Mkurugenzi wa Kituo cha Haki za Binadamu, Francis Kiwanga alisema, nguvu inayotumiwa kuwaondoa raia hao kutoka katika eneo hilo, sheria za utawala bora hazijafuatwa.

Kwa upande mwingine, Mkurugenzi Mtendaji wa TGNP, Usu Mallya alisema, kuna mapungufu mengi yaliyojitokeza katika uingiaji wa mkataba kati ya serikali, wawekezaji, halmashauri za wilaya na vijiji husika.

Akielezea ziara waliyoifanya katika eneo hilo, Mallya alisema, walibaini kuwa, mwekezaji huyo amejenga kiwanda cha ndege na kuwepo kwa mawasiliano ya moja kwa moja kutoka eneo la kitalu kwenda nchi za nje na kwamba ndege kubwa zenye uwezo wa kubeba takribani watu 400 na magari hutua katika uwanja huo.

“Hivi unaweza kuwaambia wazawa wa eneo hilo wanaharibu mazingira wakati mwekezaji ndiye wa kwanza kuharibu mazingira na hata kuteka mawasiliano ya makampuni ya simu kama ilivyotokea katika ziara, simu zetu zilibadilika na kuandika karibu katika Umoja wa Nchi za Falme za Kiarabu?” alihoji Mkurugenzi huyo.

Akielezea zaidi suala hilo, Mkurugenzi wa Chama cha Waandishi wa Habari Wanawake, Ananilea Nkya alisema, kutokana na uingizwaji wa magari yasiyo na namba za Tanzania, haijaeleweka kama kumekuwa na utaratibu upi wa ukusanyaji wa kodi.

Alishangazwa na hatua ya kampuni hiyo kupewa hadhi ya kidiplomasia, huku ikiwa imesajiliwa kama kampuni kwani kambi ya kampuni hiyo hulindwa na Jeshi la Polisi.

 

[Hukumuzuku]

Kama hawa Wafugaji wana ushahidi wa kutosha wa kumiliki ardhi/maeneo hayo, basi hawa Wanaharakati lukuki badala ya kupiga domo kwenye vyombo vya habari kwa nini wasifungue kesi kwa niaba ya Wafugaji dhidi ya Serikali kwenye Mahakama ya Kimataifa (International Court of Justice)?

 

[Lunyungu]

Lakini wacha wavune walicho kipanda.Waliirudisha CCM madarakani .Na wanaweza tena kumpa Mbunge wa kura arudi na wao kuendelea huhangaika .Waamue leo na mwaka 2010 wamalizie kabisa .

 

[Kibori]

...Lakini wacha wavune walicho kipanda.Waliirudisha CCM madarakani .... .

Mheshimiwa Lunyungu ! Mimi nadhani hapa watu wanaongelea mateso wanayopata wananchi katika nchi yao na katika aridhi yao . Kwa kweli sisi sote hatuna budi kwanza kuwapongeza wanaharakati na waandishi wa habari waliotembelea eneo na kutuhabarisha kwa undani yanajiri. Kwa kweli ni masikitiko makubwa sana na ni aibu kwa serikali .

Kauli yako hapo juu japo najua unamaanisha nini,,,,, lakini "where there is a matter of life and death" kama walivyoeleza wanaharakati mimi nadhani lugha za kisiasa kama ya kwako hapo juu kwa kweli inakatisha tamaa kwa watu hawa ambao kwa sasa wanahitaji msaada wa hali na mali kutoka kwa kila mtanzania .... hata mnasiasa mpizani tena na anayetaka kugombea ubunge tena huko loliondo asingesema kama ulivyosema wewe hata kama ingekuwa ni a good point to draw attention.. kwa wapiga kura ..lakini kwa sababu swala ni nyeti mwanasiasa makini wala asingesema hivyo labda kimoyo moyo. Angewafariji na kusema hayo ya CCM na vyama pizani baada ya kutatua tatizo.

With due respect !

 

[Augustine Moshi]

Nadhani kipindi cha utawala wa Mzee Ruksa hiyo sehemu iliuzwa kwa Waarabu bila hata kujadiliana na wakazi wake. Huo ni UKOLONI mbaya kuliko hata ule wa Mwingereza.

Sasa watu wanaambiwa ni "sheria" waondoke. Hiyo ardhi ni yao, lakini imeuzwa, na sasa kuna "sheria" waondoke. Mkataba wa kuuza ardhi yao ulijadiliwa na kupitishwa Bungeni?

We need a change next year. A change that will allow us to review all these oppressive agreements that were secretly signed by CCM leaders.

 

[Eric Cartman]

Nadhani kipindi cha utawala wa Mzee Ruksa hiyo sehemu iliuzwa kwa Waarabu bila hata kujadiliana na wakazi wake. Huo ni UKOLONI mbaya kuliko hata ule wa Mwingereza.

Sasa watu wanaambiwa ni "sheria" waondoke. Hiyo ardhi ni yao, lakini imeuzwa, na sasa kuna "sheria" waondoke. Mkataba wa kuuza ardhi yao ulijadiliwa na kupitishwa Bungeni?

We need a change next year. A change that will allow us to review all these oppressive agreements that were secretly signed by CCM leaders.

kwa kweli ata mimi sasa mnaanza kunibatiza U-Chadema na hii CCM ishaanza kunichosha kilichobaki ni kuwarudishia kadi yao tu katika moja ya haya matawi yao tuliyokuwa nayo huku, na mashati yao tena wametuuzia sio bure. lakini kabla ya haya tusubiri mwenyekiti mpya wa chadema hii ndio itakuwa sababu yangu.

huu kweli ni unyama wa kutupwa, politics aside hawa watu (wamasai) wanamila na desturi zao ambazo zina wafanya waone safety katika mazingira waliyo nayo. ni kitu kidogo sana hicho katika hekari alizopewa huyo mfalme. kama walivyosema wenyewe wakolono walio tupitia na maraisi wote waliopita waliwakuta na wakawaacha, labda sio hao waliochomewa nyumba lakini maisha wanayo ishi mpaka leo ni kama yale ya mababu zao waliowatangaulia god knows ni karne ngapi sasa?. ni kitu ambacho labda wewe uwezi thamini lakini kwao kina thamani ndio maana wanan'gan'gana maskini.

sasa iweje leo uwafukuze waende wapi, unataka kuwabadilishia watu jinsi ya kuishi kwa hela ambayo utaiacha ukifa, wakati wenzako wameeachiana jinsi yakuishi maisha yao kwa karne. mbona hawa viongozi wetu ni vipofu jamani na wana tamaa za kijinga sana.

off course mwarabu yeye anaona ushenzi tu kwani anajua nini kuhusu culture zetu sisi waafrica isitoshe royalty ambazo hawajui hata shida za mwarabu wa chini kwenye nchi zao.

huu umbavu jamani sijui wengine mme uonaje lakini kwa kweli ina kera ukiwafikiria watanzania wengine wanavyo nyanyasika kila siku, mamskini watu wenyewe hata awana makuu.

alafu kuna post inasema raisi anasema watanzania wapewe haki zao mahakamani kutoka kwa raisi wetu mi nadhani sio muoga tu bali ni mlopokaji vile vile.

 

[Indume Yene]

Kuna watu wana hisa kwenye chama Tawala, tumesikia kuwa TBC nayo inauzwa, sehemu ya nchi (Loliondo) nayo imeuzwa. Baada ya hapa what next.....mmmmh Hisa za Ikulu nazo!!! aaahha mmmh, eti umesemaje? Hisa za Ikulu? No nimesema Hizi saa za Ikulu.....ondoa nta masikioni teh teh teh.

 

[MpendaTz]

Tatizo letu watanzania ni dogo sana ... "ubinafsi".

Siku ubinafsi ukiondoka, haya mambo yote ya ufisadi na mikataba ovyo .. yoote yataisha!

Kuna ugonjwa mkubwa sana kwetu Watanzania na hili ni jambo la toka enzi za babu zetu lakini kwa sasa huu umekuwa upumbavu maana enzi zile waarabu wakija kuchukua madini na watumwa wa kuwabebea utajiri walioutoa kwetu. Inaweza kueleweka wakati huo wazee wetu walikuwa hawajaelimika. Sasa kinachofanya haya mambo kuendelea leo hii na wakati huu ni nini? Serikali nzima inauza wananchi/Taifa zima wazi wazi. Hii yote ni kutafuta njia mbadala ya kupata fedha za kampeni labda maana zile za kuchota kule Benki Kuu sasa zimegundulika.
Wananchi tunatakiwa tuwe tunahoji hata aina ya misaada tunayopata, maana kama imebidi kutuuza kama watumwa halafu ukasema kutokana na hilo tumejengewa Hospitali, basi haina maana, bora kuikosa hiyo Hospitali au barabara.
Kinachokasirisha sana ni kuwa wanaofanya haya mambo n i wale waliopitia hata Jeshini, wamefundishwa ulinzi wa Taifa, wameelimishwa namna ya kulinda hadhi ya nchi yetu, lakini wamegeuka kuwa "traitors" wa ajabu kabisa.
It pains, it chokes me!!!

 

[Patrick Nyemela]

Loliondo haijauzwa bali imekodishwa na si loliondo pekee iliyo kodishwa kama kitalu cha uwindaji. jana niliona katika taarifa ya habari (star TV) kuna sehemu ya eneo la mkoa wa Tabora (ugala) ambalo pia limekodishwa. Je tatizo ni hiyo mitambo ya mawasiliano? au kukodishwa mwarabu? Katika mawasiliano hao wanalink na Etisalate, na katika ulimwengu wa technologia ni kitu cha kawaida. Kwa taarifa yenu Etisalate wana majority shareholding katika zantel.

Je tunataka JWTZ wapigane na nani katika hili? Nadhani ni suala la TCRA kuwambia wao waarabu warekebishe hayo maneno ya "Dear Guest, welcome to the UAE, enjoy the best network coverage...For Directory service call 181 and for GPRS, MMS, 3G call Etisalate...Have a Pleasant stay at UAE".

 

[FairPlayer]

Extract Author: Lifer
Extract Date: April 16 2002 Response and explanations regarding the Article in the East African News Paper titled "Game Carnage in Tanzania Alarms Kenya".

Posted - April 16 2002 : 20:53:22
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.0 INTRODUCTION:
The East African Newspaper of 4-10 February 2002 carried an article titled "Game Carnage in Tanzania Alarms Kenya", written by John Mbaria with supplement information from Apolinari Tairo of Dar es Salaam. The article was on The Ortello Business Hunting Company, which started to hunt in the Loliondo Game Controlled Area in 1992.
The following are issues raised in the article:
a) Hunting activities carried out in Liliondo Game Controlled Area near the Tanzania / Kenyan border causes loses of 80% of the Kenyan wildlife.
b) Hunting is conducted in the migratory route in the south between Kenya and Serengeti National Park. The animals are hunted during the migratory period as they move to Kenya and on their way back to Tanzania in July to December.
c) Hunting is threatening the Kenyan tourism industry, which earns the country USD 256.0 annually.
d) The Hunting kills animals haphazardly, without proper guidance and monitoring of actual number of animals killed and exported outside the country.
e) Airplanes belonging to Ortello Business Corporation (OBC) carry unspecified type of live animals and birds from Loliondo on their way back to UAE. Further more, the air planes fly directly in and out of Loliondo without stopping at Kilimanjaro International Airport (KIA).
The following are responses to the issues raised:
2.0 Conservation of wildlife in Tanzania
Tanzania is among the top ten countries in the world rich in biodiversity. Tanzania is also leading in wildlife conservation in Africa. It has 12 National Parks, including the famous Serengeti National Park, 34 Game Reserves and 38 Game Controlled Areas. The wildlife –protected areas cover 28% of the land surface area of Tanzania. In recognition of the good conservation works, Tanzania was awarded a conservation medal in 1995 by the Safari Club International whose headquarters is in the United States of America.
Tanzania has a number of important endangered animal species in the world. Such animal species are: Black Rhino, Wild Dog, Chimpanzee, Elephant and Crocodile (Slender Snorted Crocodile).
In 1998, the Government of Tanzania adopted a Wildlife Policy, which gives direction on conservation and advocate sustainable use of wildlife resources for the benefit of the present and future generations.
3.0 Tourist Hunting
Regulated tourist Hunting or any other type of Hunting that observes conservation ethics does not negatively affect wild animal populations. This is because Hunting ethics is based on selective Hunting and not random shooting of animals. Hunting was banned in Tanzania from 1972 to 1978. The resultant effect was increased poaching and reduced government revenue from wildlife conservation. Low revenue caused low budgetary allocations to wildlife conservation activities and the lack of working gear and equipment. When the tourist Hunting resumed Elephant population increased from 44,000 (in 1989) to 45,000 (in 1994). Elephant is a keystone species in the Hunting industry and is a good indicator in showing population status of other animal species in their habitat.
In 1989 to 1993 the government revenue from the Hunting industry increased from USD 2,422,500.00 to USD 7,377,430.00. The government earned a total of USD 9.3 Million from tourist Hunting in the year 2002. Increased revenue and keystone species such as Elephant are the results of efficient implementation of good plans and policies in conservation and sustainable use of wildlife resources.
4.0 Response to the issues raised in the article
4.1 Hunting against the law by OBC
OBC is one of the 40 Hunting companies operating in Tanzania. The Company belongs to the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Different from other Hunting companies, OBC does not conduct tourist Hunting business. The Kingdom of UAE has been the client Hunting in the Loliondo Game Controlled Area since 1992.
In conducting Hunting in Loliondo Game Controlled Area, the Company adhere to the law and regulations governing the tourist Hunting industry, namely:
4.1.1 Payment of concession fee amounting to USD 7,500.00 per Hunting block per year.
4.1.2 Requesting for a Hunting quota from the Director of Wildlife, before issuance of Hunting permit.
4.1.3 Payment of game fees as stipulated by the Government.
4.1.4 Hunting only those animals shown in the Hunting permit.
4.1.5 Contributing to the development of the Hunting block, local communities' development projects and anti-poaching activities.
The following is what OBC has done so far:
· Contribution towards the development of the Ngorongoro District of USD 46,000.00
· Construction of Waso Primary and Secondary Schools, six bore holes and cattle dips and has purchased two buses to enhance/local transportation. Furthermore, OBC contributed TSh. 30.0M to six villages in the Hunting area, for providing secondary school education to 21 children.
· Purchased a generator and water pump worth TSh. 11.0M for provision of water to six villages. It has also constructed all weather roads and an airstrip within Loliondo area.
4.1.6. Different from the rest of the Hunting companies OBC Hunting period is very short. Normally the Hunting season lasts for six months, but OBC hunts for a maximum of four months. Few animals are shot from the Hunting permit.
4.2 Animals hunted in migratory routes.
The Government of Tanzania has permitted Hunting in the Loliondo Game Controlled Area and not in the migratory route between Masai Mara and Serengeti National Park. The Loliondo Game Controlled Area is a plain bordering the Serengeti National Park to the east.
4.3 The right for Tanzania to use wildlife in the Loliondo Game Controlled Area
The wildlife found in Tanzania is the property of the Government of Tanzania. The notion that these animals belong to Kenya is not correct. The wild animals in Loliondo Game Controlled Area do not have dual citizenship . Since some animal species move back and forth between Tanzania and Kenya it is better understood that these animals would be recognised to belong to either party during the time they are in that particular country. Animals in Masai Mara, Serengeti, Loliondo and Ngorongoro belong to one ecosystem namely, Serengeti ecosystem. However, Tanzania being a sovereign State with her own policies has the right by law to implement them. The same applies to Kenya, which has the right to implement its no-Hunting policy basing on the administration of her laws. Tanzania has therefore, not done anything wrong to undertake Hunting on her territory.
4.4 Hunting is threatening Kenyan tourism
Migratory animals move into Kenya during the rainy season. After the rainy season they move back to Tanzania. Animals that are hunted in Liliondo Game Controlled Area during this time of the year are very few. In the year 2000, only 150 animals were hunted, and in the year 2001 only 139 animals were hunted. It is therefore, not true that 80% of the animals in the border area were hunted. Based on this argument, it is also not true that Hunting conducted by OBC is threatening the Kenyan tourism industry. Tanzania does not allow Hunting of elephants 10 kilometres from the Tanzania/Kenya international boundary. (CITES meeting held at the Secretariat Offices in Geneva in 1993). This is an example of the measures taken to control what was erroneously referred to by the East African Paper as "haphazard Hunting of animals of Kenya".
Furthermore, it is not true that the Wildlife Division does not know the number of animals that are killed. Control of Hunting is done by the Wildlife Division, District Council and other Law Enforcement agencies. The OBC does not capture and export live animals since it does not possess valid licence to do so.
4.5 OBC airplances export assorted number of live animals from Loliondo to UAE
Capture and export of live animals and birds is conducted in accordance with the Wildlife Conservation Act No. 12 of 1974 and resolutions of the Convention on International Trade of Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). The live animal trade is also conducted in accordance with the International Air Transport Association (IATA) regulations, with regard to the size of the boxes/containers allowed to transport specific animal species in order to avoid injuries or death of the same. The principle behind the live animal trade is sustainability. CITES may prohibit exportation of animals whose trade is not sustainable. On these grounds it is obvious that CITES and therefore, its 150 members recognise that the Tanzanian live animal trade is sustainable.
Live animal traders who exports animals, birds and other live specimens are obliged to adhere to the following procedure:
i) Must hold valid licence to trade on live animals.
ii) Must hold a capture permit and thereafter an ownership permit./certificate. The number of animals possessed and the number of animals listed on the ownership permit must be consistent with the number of animals that were listed in the capture permit and actually captured and certified.
iii) Must obtain an export permit for animals listed on the ownership permit/certificate.
iv) The Officer at the point of exit must certify that the animals exported are those listed on the certificate of export. The number of animals to be exported must tally with the number listed on the certificate of export.
Verification of exported animals is conducted in collaboration with the police and customs officials.
v) The plane that will carry live animals is inspected by the Dar es Salaam and Kilimanjaro Handling Companies' Officials.
vi) For animals listed under CITES, appropriate export and import certificates are used to export the said specimens. If there is any anomaly in exporting CITES species, the importing country notifies CITES Secretariat, which in turn notifies the exporting country, and the animals in question are immediately returned to the country of export.
4.6 Other specific isues
4.6.1 Hunters are given blank permits
Companies are issued Hunting quotas before they commence Hunting activities. Each hunter is given a permit, which shows the animals that he/she is allowed to hunt depending on the quota issued and the type of safari. There are four types of safari Hunting as follows: 7, 14, 16 and 21 days safari. Each Hunting safari indicates species and numbers of animals to be hunted. When an animal is killed or wounded the officer in-charge overseeing Hunting activities signs to certify that the respective animal has been killed. If the animal has been wounded, the animal is tracked down and killed to ensure that no other animal is killed to replace the wounded animal at large. This procedure is a measure of monitoring of animals killed by hunters.
4.6.2 Good Neighbourhood Meetings between Tanzania and Kenya
There are three platforms on which Tanzania and Kenya meet to discuss conservation issues as follows:
a) The Environment and Tourism Committee of the EAC.
b) The Lusaka Agreement. In the Lusaka Agreement Meeting conservation and anti-poaching matters amongst member countries are discussed. The HQ of the Lusaka Agreement is in Nairobi.
c) Neighbourhood meeting. Experts in the contiguous conservation areas meet to discuss areas of cooperation between them, for example, in joint anti-poaching operations. Based on the regulations that govern the Hunting industry animals are not threatened by extinction since the animals that are hunted are old males for the purpose of obtaining good trophies. Trophies are attractions in this Hunting business. It is on this basis that tourist Hunting is not discussed in the said meetings, because is not an issue for both countries.
4.6.3 OBC airplanes flies directly to and from Loliondo without passing through KIA
The Tanzania Air Traffic Law requires that all airplanes land at KIA before they depart to protected areas. When the airplanes are at KIA and DIA the respective authorities conduct their duties according. The same applies when airplanes fly to UAE. They are required to land at KIA in order to go through immigration and customs checks. The allegation that OBC airplane does not land in KIA is therefore false. Furthermore, Tanzania Air Traffic Control regulates all airplanes includingly, OBC airplane at entry points.
4.6.4 OBC sprays salt in some parts of the Loliondo Game Controlled Area in order to attract animals from Serengeti National Park.
These allegations are baseless since the Tourist Hunting Regulations (2000) prohibit distribution of water and salt at the Hunting site in order to attract animals for Hunting. Besides the Game Scouts who supervise Hunting had never reported this episode. Furthermore, there are no reports that OBC is responsible for wild fires that gutters the south of the Serengeti National Park.
4.6.5 Cancellation of OBC block permit in 1999 since it was involved in the exportation of live animals.
This allegation is not true. The truth is that Hunting blocks are allocated to Hunting companies after every five years. The allocation that was done in 1995 expired in 1999. The next allocation was done in year 2000 and the companies will use the allocated blocks until 2004.
4.6.6 The UAE Royal Family contributions to the Wildlife Division
This is true. The Wildlife Division had received support from the UAE including: vehicles, transceivers and field gear in 1996. This was part of the fulfilment of the obligation by all Hunting companies to contribute towards conservation and anti-poaching activities.
Conclusion:
Records in the Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism show that there is no other District in Tanzania with Hunting area, other than Ngorongoro District, that receives enormous funds from Hunting business for community development. OBC contributes up to TSh. 354,967,000.00 annually for community development in Loliondo.
The Government of Tanzania has no reasons to stop the Hunting activities in Loliondo Game Controlled Area. The government sees that local communities and the Ngorongoro District Council benefit from the Hunting industry.
Edited by - lifer on 04/16/2002 20:57:41


Same source as above

 

[FairPlayer]

Extract Author: Indigenous Rights for Survival International
Page Number: b
Extract Date: 2/1/03 Stop the killing fields of Loliondo

[click on the link to see the original MS Word document]
Indigenous Rights for Survival International
P.O. Box 13357
Dar Es Salaam.
E-mail: ndaskoi@uccmail.co.tz
Alternative E-mail: fighters@bushlink.com

02.01.2003
The President
The United Republic of Tanzania
P.O. Box 9120
Dar Es Salaam.
Ref. No.L/32.pipex.02.
If it pleases the Honourable President Benjamin Mkapa
Re: Stop the killing fields of Loliondo
I am a Tanzanian citizen, a strong believer in social justice. Under the same spirit I am the Co-coordinator of an informal group called Indigenous Rights for Survival International (IRSI). IRSI is a loose network of young people with an interest in public policy issues in Africa. We mainly discuss policy issues through emails communications and ultimately write articles in the press. IRSI as an entity takes no position on any of the discussed issues instead it simply stimulates, steers, and co-ordinates discussions and debates on public policy issues of members' interest.
Mr. President, I have all along believed that you can stop the crime against humanity being inflicted upon the people of Loliondo, Ngorongoro District of Arusha Region by a no less authority than the Government of Tanzania.
Mr. President, Loliondo Division is located in Maasai ancestral lands in the northern part of Tanzania along the common border with Kenya. It borders the Ngorongoro highlands to the south, Serengeti National Park to the west, and the Maasai Mara Game Reserve in Kenya to the north. The Loliondo Game Controlled Area (LCGA) encompasses an estimated 4,000 sq km. There is no physical barrier separating the LGCA from other protected areas. It is a continuous ecosystem. LGCA was initially established in 1959 as a Game Reserve by the British colonialists under the then Fauna Conservation Ordinance, Section 302, a legal instrument the colonial authorities used to set aside portions of land for wildlife conservation. The legal status of the reserve was later changed to that of a Game Controlled Area to allow for commercial Hunting, a status that defines LGCA today and haunts its wildlife.
Mr. President, Loliondo forms an important part of the semi-annual migratory route of millions of wildebeests and other ungulates northward into the Maasai Mara Game Reserve and Amboseli National Park in Kenya between April and June, and returning southward later in the year. The survival of the Ngorongoro-Serengeti-Maasai Mara ecosystem and the wildlife it supports is linked to the existence of Loliondo and other surrounding communal Maasai lands in Tanzania and Kenya. Similarly, the survival of the Maasai people is dependent entirely upon the protection of their ancestral land for economic viability and cultural reproduction. Land to the Maasai is the foundation for their spirituality and the base for identity.
Mr. President, the people of Ngorongoro District in general and Loliondo Division in particular have suffered for a long time various established pains such as irrational grabbing of their ancestral land for "development", tourism (consumptive and non-consumptive) and cultivation. While the people of Loliondo have lost much of their ancestral land to cultivation, the Government is evidently supporting private investors to further put Maasai pastoralists of Loliondo at a very awkward corner.
In 1992, the administration of the former president Ali Hassan Mwinyi granted the entire Loliondo Game Controlled Area (LGCA) as a Hunting concession to the Otterlo Business Corporation Ltd (OBC), a game-Hunting firm based in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). The Government issued a 10-year Hunting permit, under the controversial agreement, to the Brigadier Mohammed Abdulrahim Al-Ali, believed to be a member of the royal family of the UAE, of Abu Dhabi in the UAE who owns (OBC). The grabbed land is a birthright land of thousands of villagers of Arash, Soitsambu, Oloipiri, Ololosokwan, Loosoito and Oloirien villages of Loliondo.
Mr. President, a Parliamentary Committee was formed to probe the Loliondo Gate saga. It revoked the dirty agreement. Strangely, a similar agreement was established.
In January 2000, OBC was granted another 5-year Hunting permit in the said area. As usual, without the villagers' consent. OBC constructed an airstrip. The villagers have been witnessing live animals being exported through the airstrip. OBC constructed structures near water sources. Hearing of the new permit, the Maasai sent a 13-men protest delegation to Dar Es Salaam in April 2000. The intention was to sort out the matter with you Mr. President. Unfortunately, they did not see you.
However, the delegation managed to hold a press conference at MAELEZO, National Information Corporation Centre. The Maasai contemplated a number of actions to be taken against both your Government and the Arab in connection with the plunder of the resources. The Maasai said that before a mass exodus of the Maasai to Kenya the first thing was to eliminate wild animals. Thereafter, the delegation retreated to Loliondo, as gravely frustrated as before.
The general election was scheduled for 2000, so the saga had to be explained away. The official statement was that power hungry opposition politicians were pushing the elders and that all the claims by the Maasai were "unfounded" and "baseless." To its credit, The Guardian went to Loliondo. It reported the following:
Maasai elders in Loliondo, Arusha Region, who recently declared a land dispute against OBC Ltd, a foreign game-Hunting firm, have accused some top Government officials of corrupt practices, saying the conflict is not political. The Arusha Regional Commissioner, Daniel ole Njoolay, recently described the simmering land dispute between the Maasai pastoralists and OBC, as a political issue.
Francis Shomet [the former Chairman for Ngorongoro District Council] claimed that Njoolay had misled Tanzanians to believe that the allegations recently raised by Maasai elders were unfounded and baseless. Fidelis Kashe, Ngorongoro District Council Chairman maintained, "We cannot stand idle to see our land being taken away by Arabs. We will kill all the animals in the area as these are the ones attracting the Arabs into our land" (The Guardian May 30, 2000).
The next morning Government officials were reported to have said the following:
The Minister for Natural Resources and Tourism, Zakia Meghji, yesterday assured Ngorongoro residents that no land has been sold or grabbed by Arabs in Loliondo. Flanked by the Arusha Regional Commissioner, Daniel ole Njoolay and the Director of Wildlife, Emanuel Severre, Meghji commented, "There is no clause on the sale of land in the contract signed between OBC and the six villages of Ololosokwan, Arash, Maaloni, Oloirien, Oloipiri and Soitsambu."
However an inquiry conducted by The Guardian in Loliondo last week established that the Maasai elders were not involved in the re-lease of the Hunting block to the company. According to Megji, her probe established that the building has been constructed about 400 metres from the water source, 200 metres more than the distance recommended by law. But The Guardian investigation shows that the structures are less than 50 metres from a spring. And another spring has dried up (The Guardian May 31, 2000).
Mr. President, underline two points. First, the Minister said the building has been constructed 400 metres from the water source. Second, "The Guardian investigation shows that the structures are less than 50 metres from a spring." Now unless one's mathematics teacher at school was daft, there is a huge different between 50 and 400! When did 50 metric metres turn to mean 400 metric metres? Can it be claimed that the Maasai were party to this so-called agreement? I am at a loss why this-well known-Minister has not been made to face the full force of the law.
In the proposal, Brigadier Al Ali outlined the benefits of his operations in Loliondo to the Government, local communities, and wildlife conservation in the Serengeti-Maasai Mara-Ngorongoro ecosystem. Among its important objectives were:
• To conserve an area contiguous to the Serengeti National Park, which is essential to the long-term survival of the ecosystem and its migration.
• To develop a new role and image for the Arab world as regards wildlife conservation, management, and human development.
• To improve locals' revenue, development facilities, and create employment.
• To generate revenues for the Central and District Governments.
The OBC now stands accused of self-contradiction and violation of legal and moral obligations in virtually all the above areas, resulting instead in environmental destruction; unfulfilled promises and exploitation of the local communities; and direct undermining of the stability of the region's wildlife and natural habitats.
It has become evident that OBC had a long-term agenda for exploiting the high concentration of wildlife in Loliondo. Its Hunting operations are guaranteed by the continuous flow of wildlife from the Serengeti, Ngorongoro, Maasai Mara, and other areas. According to the International Union for Conservation of Nature, OBC "was taking advantage of migratory patterns of wildlife coming out of Serengeti."
Mr. President, be informed that the villages in and adjacent to protected areas in Tanzania have no Government-supported infrastructures. Take Ngorongoro District for instance. There is no Government hospital in Ngorongoro. It may take a week to travel from Arusha to Loliondo, just less than 400 km, depending on weather, for there is no road. There is no even a single Government advanced level secondary education school in six (repeat six) Districts in the Greater Serengeti Region. This situation brings to question the legitimacy of wildlife conservation vis-à-vis the right of rural people to lead a decent life given nature endowment in their localities.
Mr. President, the Maasai of Loliondo have for a long time accused OBC of grave human rights abuses. They have described acts of intimidation, harassment, arbitrary arrest and detention, and even torture by OBC staff, Tanzanian police and military in the name of OBC; brazen violations of grazing and land rights; and wanton environmental destruction and imminent extermination of wildlife. They have seen leaders who once opposed OBC's practices corrupted and bought-off.
The OBC operates like a separate arm of the Government. Many people in Loliondo believe that OBC is even more powerful than the Government. The Maa word for "the Arab", Olarrabui, is often used to refer Brigadier Al Ali, and by extension OBC. The word Olarrabui has become synonymous with power, authority, brutality, fear, and entities larger than life.
Mr. President, you do not need to be a rocket scientist to comprehend that this is the clearest case of abuse of office. It is suggested, for those willing to avert disaster, the Tanzania Government included, that immediate steps be taken to put to an end the violation of fundamental human rights in Ngorongoro. As to lands lost in Loliondo, the Government is advised to return this to its owners. Land should not be grabbed senselessly. The Government, should at once, re-look into the whole matter.
Regards,
Navaya ole Ndaskoi.
CC
- The International Court of Justice
- The United Nations High Commission for Human Rights
- The United Nations Working Group on Indigenous Populations
- Human Rights Groups around the World
- Faculty of Law of the University of Dar Es Salaam
- Local and International Conservation Agencies
- Ministry of Tourism and Natural Resources
- The Attorney General
- The Chief Justice
- The Speaker of the United Republic of Tanzania Parliament
- The Press, print and electronic
- Political parties in Tanzania
- Tanganyika Law Society
- Other interested parties.

Navaya ole Ndaskoi
see also Extract 3734
The Maasai protest delegation holding a press conference in Dar Es Salaam in 2000


Source: http://www.ntz.info/gen/n01526.html

 

[FairPlayer]

Extract Author: Indigenous Rights for Survival International
Page Number: b
Extract Date: 2/1/03 Stop the killing fields of Loliondo

[click on the link to see the original MS Word document]
Indigenous Rights for Survival International
P.O. Box 13357
Dar Es Salaam.
E-mail: ndaskoi@uccmail.co.tz
Alternative E-mail: fighters@bushlink.com

02.01.2003
The President
The United Republic of Tanzania
P.O. Box 9120
Dar Es Salaam.
Ref. No.L/32.pipex.02.
If it pleases the Honourable President Benjamin Mkapa
Re: Stop the killing fields of Loliondo
I am a Tanzanian citizen, a strong believer in social justice. Under the same spirit I am the Co-coordinator of an informal group called Indigenous Rights for Survival International (IRSI). IRSI is a loose network of young people with an interest in public policy issues in Africa. We mainly discuss policy issues through emails communications and ultimately write articles in the press. IRSI as an entity takes no position on any of the discussed issues instead it simply stimulates, steers, and co-ordinates discussions and debates on public policy issues of members’ interest.
Mr. President, I have all along believed that you can stop the crime against humanity being inflicted upon the people of Loliondo, Ngorongoro District of Arusha Region by a no less authority than the Government of Tanzania.
Mr. President, Loliondo Division is located in Maasai ancestral lands in the northern part of Tanzania along the common border with Kenya. It borders the Ngorongoro highlands to the south, Serengeti National Park to the west, and the Maasai Mara Game Reserve in Kenya to the north. The Loliondo Game Controlled Area (LCGA) encompasses an estimated 4,000 sq km. There is no physical barrier separating the LGCA from other protected areas. It is a continuous ecosystem. LGCA was initially established in 1959 as a Game Reserve by the British colonialists under the then Fauna Conservation Ordinance, Section 302, a legal instrument the colonial authorities used to set aside portions of land for wildlife conservation. The legal status of the reserve was later changed to that of a Game Controlled Area to allow for commercial Hunting, a status that defines LGCA today and haunts its wildlife.
Mr. President, Loliondo forms an important part of the semi-annual migratory route of millions of wildebeests and other ungulates northward into the Maasai Mara Game Reserve and Amboseli National Park in Kenya between April and June, and returning southward later in the year. The survival of the Ngorongoro-Serengeti-Maasai Mara ecosystem and the wildlife it supports is linked to the existence of Loliondo and other surrounding communal Maasai lands in Tanzania and Kenya. Similarly, the survival of the Maasai people is dependent entirely upon the protection of their ancestral land for economic viability and cultural reproduction. Land to the Maasai is the foundation for their spirituality and the base for identity.
Mr. President, the people of Ngorongoro District in general and Loliondo Division in particular have suffered for a long time various established pains such as irrational grabbing of their ancestral land for “development”, tourism (consumptive and non-consumptive) and cultivation. While the people of Loliondo have lost much of their ancestral land to cultivation, the Government is evidently supporting private investors to further put Maasai pastoralists of Loliondo at a very awkward corner.
In 1992, the administration of the former president Ali Hassan Mwinyi granted the entire Loliondo Game Controlled Area (LGCA) as a Hunting concession to the Otterlo Business Corporation Ltd (OBC), a game-Hunting firm based in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). The Government issued a 10-year Hunting permit, under the controversial agreement, to the Brigadier Mohammed Abdulrahim Al-Ali, believed to be a member of the royal family of the UAE, of Abu Dhabi in the UAE who owns (OBC). The grabbed land is a birthright land of thousands of villagers of Arash, Soitsambu, Oloipiri, Ololosokwan, Loosoito and Oloirien villages of Loliondo.
Mr. President, a Parliamentary Committee was formed to probe the Loliondo Gate saga. It revoked the dirty agreement. Strangely, a similar agreement was established.
In January 2000, OBC was granted another 5-year Hunting permit in the said area. As usual, without the villagers’ consent. OBC constructed an airstrip. The villagers have been witnessing live animals being exported through the airstrip. OBC constructed structures near water sources. Hearing of the new permit, the Maasai sent a 13-men protest delegation to Dar Es Salaam in April 2000. The intention was to sort out the matter with you Mr. President. Unfortunately, they did not see you.
However, the delegation managed to hold a press conference at MAELEZO, National Information Corporation Centre. The Maasai contemplated a number of actions to be taken against both your Government and the Arab in connection with the plunder of the resources. The Maasai said that before a mass exodus of the Maasai to Kenya the first thing was to eliminate wild animals. Thereafter, the delegation retreated to Loliondo, as gravely frustrated as before.
The general election was scheduled for 2000, so the saga had to be explained away. The official statement was that power hungry opposition politicians were pushing the elders and that all the claims by the Maasai were “unfounded” and “baseless.” To its credit, The Guardian went to Loliondo. It reported the following:
Maasai elders in Loliondo, Arusha Region, who recently declared a land dispute against OBC Ltd, a foreign game-Hunting firm, have accused some top Government officials of corrupt practices, saying the conflict is not political. The Arusha Regional Commissioner, Daniel ole Njoolay, recently described the simmering land dispute between the Maasai pastoralists and OBC, as a political issue.
Francis Shomet [the former Chairman for Ngorongoro District Council] claimed that Njoolay had misled Tanzanians to believe that the allegations recently raised by Maasai elders were unfounded and baseless. Fidelis Kashe, Ngorongoro District Council Chairman maintained, “We cannot stand idle to see our land being taken away by Arabs. We will kill all the animals in the area as these are the ones attracting the Arabs into our land” (The Guardian May 30, 2000).
The next morning Government officials were reported to have said the following:
The Minister for Natural Resources and Tourism, Zakia Meghji, yesterday assured Ngorongoro residents that no land has been sold or grabbed by Arabs in Loliondo. Flanked by the Arusha Regional Commissioner, Daniel ole Njoolay and the Director of Wildlife, Emanuel Severre, Meghji commented, “There is no clause on the sale of land in the contract signed between OBC and the six villages of Ololosokwan, Arash, Maaloni, Oloirien, Oloipiri and Soitsambu.”
However an inquiry conducted by The Guardian in Loliondo last week established that the Maasai elders were not involved in the re-lease of the Hunting block to the company. According to Megji, her probe established that the building has been constructed about 400 metres from the water source, 200 metres more than the distance recommended by law. But The Guardian investigation shows that the structures are less than 50 metres from a spring. And another spring has dried up (The Guardian May 31, 2000).
Mr. President, underline two points. First, the Minister said the building has been constructed 400 metres from the water source. Second, “The Guardian investigation shows that the structures are less than 50 metres from a spring.” Now unless one’s mathematics teacher at school was daft, there is a huge different between 50 and 400! When did 50 metric metres turn to mean 400 metric metres? Can it be claimed that the Maasai were party to this so-called agreement? I am at a loss why this-well known-Minister has not been made to face the full force of the law.
In the proposal, Brigadier Al Ali outlined the benefits of his operations in Loliondo to the Government, local communities, and wildlife conservation in the Serengeti-Maasai Mara-Ngorongoro ecosystem. Among its important objectives were:
• To conserve an area contiguous to the Serengeti National Park, which is essential to the long-term survival of the ecosystem and its migration.
• To develop a new role and image for the Arab world as regards wildlife conservation, management, and human development.
• To improve locals’ revenue, development facilities, and create employment.
• To generate revenues for the Central and District Governments.
The OBC now stands accused of self-contradiction and violation of legal and moral obligations in virtually all the above areas, resulting instead in environmental destruction; unfulfilled promises and exploitation of the local communities; and direct undermining of the stability of the region’s wildlife and natural habitats.
It has become evident that OBC had a long-term agenda for exploiting the high concentration of wildlife in Loliondo. Its Hunting operations are guaranteed by the continuous flow of wildlife from the Serengeti, Ngorongoro, Maasai Mara, and other areas. According to the International Union for Conservation of Nature, OBC "was taking advantage of migratory patterns of wildlife coming out of Serengeti."
Mr. President, be informed that the villages in and adjacent to protected areas in Tanzania have no Government-supported infrastructures. Take Ngorongoro District for instance. There is no Government hospital in Ngorongoro. It may take a week to travel from Arusha to Loliondo, just less than 400 km, depending on weather, for there is no road. There is no even a single Government advanced level secondary education school in six (repeat six) Districts in the Greater Serengeti Region. This situation brings to question the legitimacy of wildlife conservation vis-à-vis the right of rural people to lead a decent life given nature endowment in their localities.
Mr. President, the Maasai of Loliondo have for a long time accused OBC of grave human rights abuses. They have described acts of intimidation, harassment, arbitrary arrest and detention, and even torture by OBC staff, Tanzanian police and military in the name of OBC; brazen violations of grazing and land rights; and wanton environmental destruction and imminent extermination of wildlife. They have seen leaders who once opposed OBC’s practices corrupted and bought-off.
The OBC operates like a separate arm of the Government. Many people in Loliondo believe that OBC is even more powerful than the Government. The Maa word for "the Arab", Olarrabui, is often used to refer Brigadier Al Ali, and by extension OBC. The word Olarrabui has become synonymous with power, authority, brutality, fear, and entities larger than life.
Mr. President, you do not need to be a rocket scientist to comprehend that this is the clearest case of abuse of office. It is suggested, for those willing to avert disaster, the Tanzania Government included, that immediate steps be taken to put to an end the violation of fundamental human rights in Ngorongoro. As to lands lost in Loliondo, the Government is advised to return this to its owners. Land should not be grabbed senselessly. The Government, should at once, re-look into the whole matter.
Regards,
Navaya ole Ndaskoi.
CC
- The International Court of Justice
- The United Nations High Commission for Human Rights
- The United Nations Working Group on Indigenous Populations
- Human Rights Groups around the World
- Faculty of Law of the University of Dar Es Salaam
- Local and International Conservation Agencies
- Ministry of Tourism and Natural Resources
- The Attorney General
- The Chief Justice
- The Speaker of the United Republic of Tanzania Parliament
- The Press, print and electronic
- Political parties in Tanzania
- Tanganyika Law Society
- Other interested parties.

Navaya ole Ndaskoi
see also Extract 3734
The Maasai protest delegation holding a press conference in Dar Es Salaam in 2000


Source: http://www.ntz.info/gen/n01526.html

 

[FairPlayer]

1
THE CONFLICT BETWEEN LOITA MAASAI AND THE BATEMI
IN LOLIONDO AND SALE DIVISIONS, NGORONGORO
DISTRICT -TANZANIA
A REPORT OF THE FACT FINDING MISSION WHICH TOOK
PLACE FROM 21ST JULY TO 1ST AUGUST 2004
BY
PASTORALISTS INDIGENOUS NGOs (PINGOs) FORUM
AND
LAND RIGHTS RESEARCH AND RESOURCES INSTITUTE
LARRRI/HAKIARDHI
RESEARCH TEAM:
1. EDWARD POROKWA-Coordinator-PINGOs Forum
2. WILLIAM OLENASHA- Programme Officer –PINGOs Forum
3. RAPHAEL MAKO-VOLUNTEER- PINGOs Forum
4. YEFRED MNYENZI-PROGRAMME OFFICER- HAKIARDHI
5. EMMANUEL MVULA-INTERN- HAKIARDHI
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS Page
Title:
The conflict between Loita Maasai and the Batemi in loliondo and Sale
Division; A report of the fact finding mission which took place from 21st
July to August 2004
1
1 Executive summary 4
2 Introduction 5
3 Ngorongoro District: The people, the geography, the politics,
social relations, and land dispute.
6
3.1 District profile and the people 6
3.2 The people and their origins 6
3.3 Source and history of the conflicts 7
3.4 Land Disputes in the 90's 7
4 Analyses of the causes Conflicts 9
4.1 Poor Management and administration land 9
4.2 Ethnicity 10
4.3 Scarcity of Land and Population Growth 10
4.4 Diversification of livelihoods 11
4.5 Proliferation of small arms 11
4.6 Issues on and around the Kenyan Border 11
4.7 The role of politicians and the central and local government
bureaucracy
12
5 Recommendations 13
5.1 Traditional dialogue 13
5.2 Dissolution of the Committee of Councillors 14
5.3 Re-demarcation of boundaries according to the land and
village Land Acts, 1999 (no 4 and 5, respectively)
14
3
5.4 Implementation the dispute settlement mechanisms of the
new land laws
15
5.5 Awareness of the new land laws 15
5.6 Joint land use plans 16
5.7 Disarmament 16
5.8 Police Posts in the conflict areas 16
5.9 Resolving problems to the border with Kenya 16
6 Conclusion 17
List of acronyms
ADDO Arusha Diocesan Development Organisation
CRT Community Resource Team
DC District Commissioner
IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature
KIPOK Korongoro integrated Peoples Oriented to Conservation
LADO Laramatak Development Organisation
LARRRI Land Rights Research and Resources Institute
NCA Ngorongoro Conservation Area
NGO's Non-Governmental Organisation
OBC Ortello Business Corporation
PINGO's Pastoralists Indigenous NGO's
SRCS Serengeti Regional Conservation Strategy
4
1. Executive Summary
The conflict for which the research team has taken immediate measures to find its
causes and give recommendations for its complete arrest, took place from the 1st-
14th July 2004 on the frontiers of Engusero Sambu and Kisangiro villages, in the
divisions of Loliondo and Sale respectively, both of Ngorongoro District.
The Maasai pastoralists who constitute the majority and the Sonjo agro-pastoralists
who constitute the minority, among other groups, inhabit the district. The two
groups have a prolonged history of hostile relations and tensions.
The history behind the existing conflict goes back to 1975 when the most intense
fight between the two was first recorded. Many lives were claimed in a fight that
was triggered by cattle thefts.
The conflicting situation was temporarily arrested in the late 70's when the late
premier Edward Sokoine mediated the same by using traditional means of conflict
resolution.
The conflict between the two sides gathered new momentum after 1990 when a
highly disputed land demarcation and issuance of title deeds to some villages was
done by the Arusha Development Diocesan Organisation (ADDO), Korongoro
Integrated Peoples Oriented to Conservation (KIPOC), International Union for
Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and Serengeti Regional Conservation Strategy
(SRCS). It however blew in 1995 when a young Maasai man stole a shoe belonging
to a Sonjo trader in a local market, an incidence that quite surprisingly exploded in
bloodshed of a magnitude not seen to date.
The research team has managed to come up with a score of causes that can be
said to underlie the conflict. These are no less than poor management and
administration of land; ethnic hatreds; scarcity of land and population growth;
diversification of livelihoods; proliferation of small arms; access and control of the
Kenyan border and the role of politicians and the government bureaucracy.
From the findings and the causes of the conflict the team has come up with
recommendations deemed necessary to arrest the conflict, both temporarily and
permanently. These include, dissolution of the existing committee of councillors;
re-demarcation of boundaries employing procedures detailed in the land and
village land acts; initiation of traditional dialogue; awareness of the substance and
procedures of the new land acts; joint of land use plans; implementing the dispute
settlement mechanisms of the new land laws; control of border activities with
neighbouring Kenya; disarmament; and the building of police posts in the conflict
zone.
In conclusion, prevention is better than cure. The government and other
stakeholders should therefore address potential conflicts in a timely manner before
they escalate into large-scale conflicts that claim innocent lives and destroy
valuable property that is difficult to replace.
5
2. Introduction
The long unresolved conflict and misunderstanding between the Batemi (commonly
known as the Sonjo) and the Loita section of the Maasai, currently re-emerged on
the frontiers of Engusero-Sambu and Kisangiro villages of Loliondo and Sale
divisions respectively. The fight that started on 1st July to 14th July 2004 led to
the death of a young Loita Maasai warrior identified as Kaiki Tanguyu and serious
bodily injuries from bullets sustained by Njangeni Kigoya, a Loita Masaai. There
were serious losses of property sustained by both sides. It is said that the Sonjo
lost about 25 goats while the Maasai lost about 72 individual houses and crops
among others. The fighting has now been brought to a temporary stop by the
government but the situation is still tense and there is general fear that a more
deadly fight can still breakout if the situation is not addressed properly and
promptly.
Pastoralists Indigenous NGO's (PINGO's) Forum and its Dar es Salaam based partner
Land Rights Research and Resources Institute (LARRRI), agreed to carry a fact
finding mission on the immediate and root causes of the conflict, with the superior
objective of generating recommendations that can be used by different
stakeholders for devising a permanent solution to the same. Community Resource
Team (CRT) and Laramatak Development Organisation (LADO), both members to
PINGO's Forum of the Loliondo cluster, joined the two lead organisations in the
subject research.
The research team, has herein below, managed to come with findings and
recommendations that are considered necessary for addressing the simmering
conflict. The findings and recommendations were generated through actual field
visit to the villages in the conflict, interviewing different actors, as well as
research on different documents and literature related to the conflict.
It is our expectation that the fronted recommendations will assist different players
to come up with prompt and action oriented plans to bring the conflict to a
permanent end.
6
3. Ngorongoro District: The people, the geography, the politics, social
relations, and land disputes
3.1 District profile and the people
Ngorongoro District is among the five Districts making up Arusha Region in North
Eastern Tanzania. Other districts are Karatu, Monduli, Arumeru, and Arusha urban.
Ngorongoro is one of the most famous districts in Tanzania, not only because of the
Ngorongoro crater and other tourist attractions, but also because of pronounced land
use conflicts. The area is home to the famous Loliondo Game Controlled Area which
hosts the hunting empire of Ortello Business Corporation (OBC), whose presence and
dealings in the area has generated a lot of criticisms and has in some circles been
nicknamed the ‘Loliondogate'.
The District divides into three divisions, which are Ngorongoro, Loliondo and Sale. The
District has a population 129,000 people according to the 2002 census. 59% of the
District's landmass falls within the famous Ngorongoro Conservation Area which was
established in 1959 to deal with matters related to the conservation of wildlife
resources, promotion of tourism and the development of indigenous Maasai pastoralists
living in the area.
Loliondo division, which divides into a number of wards and villages, is inhabited
mostly by Maasai who are traditionally pastoralist but who now practice farming as
well. The Batemi (commonly known as Sonjo) and other groups also live in the area
and they are mostly farmers even though they also keep domestic animals. The
division is made up of the villages of Loliondo, Sakala, Ngwarrwa/Enguserosambu,
Oloirien/Magaiduru, Soitsambu, Ololosokwan, Oloipir, Arrash and Maaloni.
As for Sale division, most of its residents are agro-pastoralist. The division is made up
of the villages of Tinaga, Mgongo, Kisangiro, Samunge, Yasimdito , Digodigo, Malambo,
Piyaya, Pinyinyi and Engaresero.
The three divisions are characterized by differences in natural resources endowments,
modes of production, the history and cultures of their inhabitants. There are very
complex and hostile socio-economic and political relations between Maasai and the
Batemi of the Sale and Loliondo Divisions, as will be seen in the next sections of this
report.
3.2 The people and their origins
Geographically, Sale division and part of Loliondo division border with Kenya on their
North. The Batemi inhabit in six villages of Sale division (Tinaga, mgongo, kisangiro,
Samunge, Yasimdito and Digodigo). Sale and Oldonyo sambu villages are inhabited by
both the Maasai and Batemi.
The Sonjo are believed to be a decent of Kurya from Mara region that was defeated by
other tribes during tribal wars in the region. BATEMI or WATEMI is the name given to
the tribe, which means Bantu farmers. However, the Sonjo elders refute affinity with
Kurya and insist that they have lived in the area for over one thousand years. The
7
Maasai themselves are believed to have originated from the north and those
interviewed admitted to have relatives in Kenya.
3.3 Sources and history of the conflicts
The differences between the Maasai and Sonjo are historically associated with cattle
rustling. This trend continued up to the early 1990's when conflicts took a new shape
to involve other issues. Maasai and Sonjo warriors would raid each other's cattle for
either prestige or to increase their herds. Conflicts that would emanate were always
resolved through a mutual understanding of elders to avoid further fighting and
killings. Stolen animals were always returned or compensated. The first serious
dispute based on cattle raids occurred in 1975. It involved Maasai and Sonjo warriors in
the villages of Kisangiro, Enguserosambu, Samunge and Maaloni. Several people were
injured, houses burnt and properties destroyed. At least two people were killed in
Kisangiro Village. This practice is gradually loosing meaning and eventually fading out.
Commercial interests have replaced prestige and other traditional meanings attached
to the practice. Disputes over cattle raids have, over time, been replaced by those
related to resources, most notably land, water and pastures.
3.4 Land Disputes in the 90's
In 1990, a joint survey project was carried out by ADDO, KIPOK, IUCN and SRCS, using
experts from the regional land office. The project was aimed at demarcating
boundaries between villages in order to secure villages lands that were threatened by
commercial interests in farming and the expansion of the conservation empire. Mr.
Benedict Nangoro, then a director at ADDO, recalls the threats which prompted
different stakeholders to undertake this project included, mounting pressure from
commercial farmers outside Ngorongoro District who wanted huge chunks of land to
establish large estates. Secondly, the threat from conservation interests, which
wanted to expand wildlife protected areas into the lowlands of Loliondo. Thirdly,
Tanzania Breweries had shown interest and applied for thousands of acres of land in
Sukenya lowlands for barley farming. And lastly, the dairy farm project was to be
established in a couple of villages of Loliondo division, which would further reduce
traditional pastoralists' lands. The rationale behind ADDO's project was therefore to
protect or secure land rights of local communities vis a vis outside interests and
threats.
Demarcation of boundaries according to Mr. Ole Saitabau2 took place in all villages of
Loliondo and Sale division. He recalls that boundaries were drawn after a team of
villagers from all villages involved in the disputes agreed on the border signs such as
beacons, big trees and distinct rocks. He further acknowledged the availability of
minutes, maps, title deeds of some villages and report of the boundary demarcation
project, which unfortunately, he was not ready to share with the research the team.
He advised the team to consult the ministry of Lands and Human Settlement
Development for those documents and related matters.
Another important aspect in this project according to Mr. Saitabau is that very few
villages reached a consensus on their boundaries. In most cases, there was no
agreement between Maasai and Sonjo villages, especially where the new boundaries
disregarded traditional boundaries of the two tribes. There were for instance
8
disagreements between the villages of Sale and Pinyinyi, Samunge and Losoito,
Digodigo and Muholo and Digodigo and pinyinyi, with each village claiming that the
new demarcations had reduced the size of its land. As result, few villages received
title deeds and maps while others (where demarcation was not completed) could not
get title deeds. Although initially the project was aimed at resolving land disputes
and securing people's rights to land, the trend and field realities show that it just set
out further and probably more serious land disputes in the area.2
Between 1991 and 1994 there were serious disputes over those boundaries in a number
of Sonjo and Maasai villages, which did not erupt into fighting until a year later.
However they called for the attention and intervention at the national level
leadership. In 1994, the then Minister for Lands, Housing and Urban Development
Edward Lowasa, Ordered the Ngorongoro District Council to nullify and resurvey the
boundaries in order that villagers from both sides fully participate and consent the
demarcation of the boundaries. The villages to be resurveyed according the Minister's
order were; Soitsambu, Ololosokwani, Oloipiri, Ng'arwa, Enguserusambu, Loisoiti-
Maaloni, Arrashi, Sakala and Loliondo3. 3In 1995 the tension between the two sides had
grown beyond control with each side claiming that its boundaries are being tresspassed
by the other. All sides were accusing the district authorities (both council and
District Commissioner's office), for failing to secure and protect their rights against the
other group. It was in August 1995 when the tension broke into fighting. The villages
involved in the clashes were Samunge, Mgongo, Tinaga and Yasimdito on one side
(sonjo), and Ng'arwa, Olerienmagaiduru, Maaloni and Losoito/Sale on other (Maasai).
The clash began at a local market (mnada) after a Maasai man stole a traditional
sandal (Katambuga) that belonged to a Sonjo trader. The aftermath spread to all the
villages. It is very difficult to make link between the theft of the sandal and land or
boundaries demarcations but because of the tension that had grown since early 1990's,
it is necessary that we establish such a linkage. The clashes resulted into loss of
people's life, destruction of property and destabilization of development activities,
besides other consequences.
The conflict that prompted intervention by the present research team occurred
between July 1st to 12th, 2004 involving Kisangiro (sonjo) and Engusero Sambu (Maasai)
villages. This time around, the Sonjo in Kisangiro claim to have been invaded by a
group of Maasai pastoralists from Engusero Sambu village and others from Kenya. The
flocking in of those pastoralists into Kisangiro village is allegedly linked to the Loliondo
District Councillors' Committee (the committee on land issues) formed to resolve
boundary conflicts between villages and facilitate inter village committees to agree on
their boundaries. Sonjo villages claim that the committee is partial and that the
Maasai are the majority tribe in it. It also alleged that the committee was imposing
decisions instead of facilitating villagers to reach mutual agreement. There is no
documented evidence to show the terms of reference for the committee but given the
tense situation between villages where the committee had operated, the District
Commissioner ordered it to stop its work until further directives. The July 2004 fights
resulted into the death of one person (Maasai), injuries to five (one Maasai and four
2 Mr. Ole Saitabau is a surveyor from Arusha Region Land office who was involved in the project
to demarcate boundaries in Loliondo and Sale division villages. He has vast information on the
actual work done by ADDO and his office in the field but was too busy to offer the team
adequate time for interview and validation of findings from other respondents.
3 Daily news paper Saturday, April 16, 1994
9
Sonjo), destruction of crops, burning of 7 Cattle sheds '(Bomas), 72 houses and 11-
crop storage huts (DC, personal committee).
The historical and immediate causes of the conflict are complex as will be seen in the
coming section of this report. We have tried to highlight some key issues related to
natural resources endowment, ethnic composition and social relationships between
the two groups, all in a bid to explore the allegedly areas of disagreements and
clashes. Access to resources especially land and the question of representation to
decision-making bodies seem to suggest a new dimension to the conflict. The Sonjo
feel marginalized and that their interests and grievances are not being addressed by
the District government. On the other hand, the Maasai claim that the District
government has failed to stop Sonjo's expansion into their grazing lands. Probably,
there is a need to further explore this question with a view to find out how other
actors and issues related to access to resources and control of decision making
processes feature in this complex situation. Indeed, the causes of this conflict go
beyond ethnic differences.
4. Analyses of the Causes of the Conflict
The conflict between the Loita Maasai and the Batemi(Sonjo) cannot be attributed
to a single cause, it is a combination of a plethora of causes ,both immediate and
historical. The research team, through its findings, has managed to come up with
the following causes that are thought to characterise the present conflict.
4.1 Poor management and land administration
Matters relating to the management and administration of land lie at the root of
many land conflicts in the country. The Presidential Commission of Inquiry into
Land Matters has already observed this when it reported, among other things, that
'…the utter disorder in land tenure and regime1', is responsible for many land
conflicts in the country. The situation in Ngorongoro and especially in Loliondo and
Sale Divisions is a living example of the subject chaotic and disorderly arrangement
in land management and administration.
Sale and Loliondo divisions have no clear boundaries to the extent that
administrators do not even know the geographical limits of their jurisdictions.
There has never been a systematic demarcation of the two divisions. The
boundaries of villages in the two divisions are consequently contested and are a
major cause of the escalating violence.
The boundaries between the two conflicting sides are not administratively defined
but are customary and tribal. The land regime in our republic knows nothing about
tribal land boundaries but village land boundaries. The situation in the two
divisions is such that people do not talk of village boundaries but those of Loita
Maasai and the Batemi. The interest of the two groups is to protect and expand
their traditional territories, much against the interest of the other.
1 The report of the presidential Commission of Inquiry into land Matters, Vol 1 pg xii
10
4.2 Ethnicity
Ethnic tensions and hatreds have characterised the African Continent for many
years and are responsible of many conflicts. Ethnic conflicts in Tanzania are
however, few and relatively small in size and effect, unlike the case in many other
countries on the continent. This is largely attributable to the ‘unificationist'
politics and policies of the defunct ujamaa era. The same are now re-emerging and
being re-shaped as a result of resource based conflicts caused by new arrangement
in resource management and administration, championed by the sweeping forces
of globalisation and ultra liberal social, political and economic policies. The
conflict between the Batemi and Loita is deeply rooted in historical tribal
ethnicity.
The Batemi and the Loita Maasai have no history of friendship and mutual cohesion
despite being close neighbours. It is however necessary to observe, albeit, in
passing, that the Batemi are not in enmity with the entire Maasai community as
has erroneously been displayed by the media and other actors. So, while the
Batemi have intermarried with the Salei section of the Maasai, there are very few,
if any, marriages between them and the Lolita.
Ethnic tensions between the two groups have also expressed themselves through
cattle thefts. Even though this cannot define ethnicity, it has helped to fuel and
sustain the violence. The Maasai are traditionally known to take pride in stealing
other livestock from other tribes, but nothing comes close to the tension the
practice has generated between the two neighbours.
It is because of the deep-rooted ethnic hatred and tension that even minor
rumblings between the two can explode into large-scale tribal wars. In 1995 for
example, a mere stealing of a shoe (Katambuga) by a Maasai in a local market, led
to a hitherto unprecedented fracas between the two that claimed hundreds of
innocent lives.
4.3 Scarcity of Land and Population Growth
The area where the two warring groups inhabit is limited in size. The Batemi
occupy an area, which is small, rocky and topographically unfriendly. There are
areas that cannot be reached by roads. They are literally strangled and squeezed
between mountains and lowlands, even though their land has the best water
resources. With the increase of population over years, the area is becoming
smaller, thus increasing pressure and demand for extra land. There has therefore
been a demonstrated desire and actual practice by the Batemi to expand out of
the lowlands into what is considered traditional Loita territories. Likewise,
population growth among the Loita, and with allegations of immigrations from
Kenya, has increased desires for expansion of lands towards areas that are
considered Batemi's. The logical outcome of this potential and actual expansion of
land into each other's territory is increased tensions and conflicts over critical land
resources. This is compounded by lack of clear and mutually agreed boundaries
between them.
11
4.4 Diversification of livelihoods
The Loita, just like many other Maasai are traditionally pastoralists. Their
counterparts, the Batemi, are traditionally farmers. Over the last couple of
decades however, both groups have diversified their economic mainstays and
adopted other forms of economies that were not in existence before. The Loita are
now practicing farming as well. The Batemi themselves are now agro-pastoralists.
When the team visited villages like Engosero sambu and Oloirien/ Magaiduru, for
example, they were surprised by the amount of land that has been turned into
farming. This is the case when they paid a visit to Kisangiro, where they found
substantial amounts of livestock, a reality that was not in existence in the past.
Diversification of livelihoods has meant demand for more land to accommodate the
newly acquired mainstays by both groups. This has meant for example that the
Loita have to graze their animals further from their homesteads to allow
cultivation to take place near homes. Likewise, the Batemi now need to acquire
more land to be able to practise animal husbandry away from the farmlands. What
this shift has meant in reality, is the fact that the two groups are expanding their
territories and consequently encroaching into each other's traditional land making
conflicts across borders a logical inevitability. The recent conflict between the
villages of Engosero Sambu and Kisangiro is, among other things, alleged to be a
result of expansion of land uses across the frontiers.
4.5 Proliferation of small arms
Uncontrolled possession of illegally acquired and owning small arms amongst the
warring factions cannot be separated from the other contributory agents to the
simmering conflict. There is enough evidence to ascertain that guns have actually
been employed in the ongoing confrontation. During the most recent physical
encounter between the two sides, one person was killed and another injured by
bullets (DC personal comm.) The research team itself witnessed the use of arms in
Naam hamlet of Enguserosambu during site visits on 23rd July 2004 where a score
of Batemi tribesmen attacked people harvesting maize firing three bullets before
disappearing into the unknown.
The ownership of small arms among the insurgents, and perhaps other areas of the
District, is associated to the illegal trade, most notably in arms between the locals
and the Somali bandits who flocked the District in numbers in the 80's and 90's.
The possession of arms is not in itself a cause for the conflict but arguably a strong
incentive and assurance of victory in battle, among groups that have traditionally
been at loggerheads with one another.
4.6 Issues on and around the Kenyan Border
Loliondo and Sale Divisions of Ngorongoro District closely border Narok County
Council in neighbouring Kenya. Border trade has and continue to be a critical and
important aspect of people's livelihoods from both countries. The territory
12
inhabited by Loita Maasai of Tanzania is a part of the greater Loita territory, which
extends deeply into Kenya. Artificial borders created by colonial masters have
theoretically interfered with this reality, but the people themselves have found no
incentive to respect them. The Loita continue to move across borders as if they did
not exist in the first place.
The Batemi though close to the border, cannot access the same with relative ease
like their counterparts since they have to cross traditional enemy and hostile
territory when they want to trade with Kenyans. This has meant that the
agricultural produce of the highly productive Batemi territory cannot access the
profitable Kenyan market without impediments.
There have therefore been strong ambitions and struggles for the Batemi to access
the border thereby clashing with their Loita neighbours.
The research team has also found out that the Batemi complain that the Kenyan
Loita Maasai have immigrated into the Tanzanian side in big numbers thereby
increasing pressure on already contested and limited land resources. This finding is
also supported by the DC, who narrates that when he went to the battle field to
call the fight off, the Batemi fighters wanted to be given permission to finish the
Kenyan intruders (‘Mkuu wacha tuwamalize hawa wavamizi wa Kenya', are his
exact words)
4.7 The role of politicians and the central and local government bureaucracy
The conflict in question has not escaped the eyes and ears of the politicians and
the government. Solutions and political fiat to resolve the conflict has however not
been easily forthcoming. The local people complain of the government not having
given the conflict the weight it deserves.
The role of the government in the conflict perhaps predates the present chapter of
the conflict. The late premier Sokoine is known to have resolved the conflict
between the Batemi and Loita and Salei Sections of the Maasai in late 70's by
employing traditional means of conflict resolution.
The recurrence of the conflict is blamed by the Loita tribesmen to two successful
District Commissioners who happened to be from the Batemi tribe. According to
their view, the DC's actually encouraged the Batemi to invade on their land and
not to respect the boundaries that were put in place by ADDO in 1990. Immediately
after the resurgence of the deadly 1995 conflict, Elias Goroi, the then DC was
relocated, a move that is linked to his questionable partiality in the conflict.
Recently, the Premier Sumaye visited Ngorongoro and when he was told of the
boundary conflict, his remark was that Tanzania is one free country and everybody
had the right to live anywhere he deemed fit. While his was a factual honest
observation, the locals took this to mean that there is no need to respect
boundaries and it was a great incentive for lawlessness.
13
The composition of the committee that was appointed to resolve the border
conflict in itself has been a subject of grievances by the Batemi. For them, the
committee is impartial and has shown outright inclination to favour one side in the
conflict.
The way the district government handled the present conflict has not received a
lot of applaud from the locals. The Loita Maasai complain that the government was
partial and that it was favouring the Batemi in the conflict. The failure by the
police to prevent the arson when they were actually in the battlefield raises
doubts as to the capacity and the will of the district authorities to enforce law and
order. There are complaints among the Loita that while they were forced to
retreat from the battlefield, the same command was not meted out to the Sonjo,
leaving the latter free to burn property.
Then too, when our team visited the battlefield on the 23rd the situation was still
tense and yet the police had long retired to their barracks. The practice is
normally for the police to remain on the frontiers until matters have calmed down
completely.
5. Recommendations
The causes and the history behind the conflict have been ascertained to a large
extent. There could be other causes that might have escaped the eyes of the
research team. What remains is how to find lasting solutions to the same. We
herein below, therefore, attempt to suggest some measures that we consider
necessary in arresting the confrontation, both temporally and permanently. The
recommendations given below are not by any means meant to pre-empt others
that might be generated in any other fora for resolution.
5.1 Traditional dialogue
The study findings indicate that the present conflict is traditional and ethnic in
character. Conflicts of this nature will thus require a traditional solution. Solving
this conflict through the government's apparatus of enforcing law and order can
only yield temporary and cosmetic results. The traditional people stand in a better
position to know how best to resolve their conflict, since they are the ones who
have to shoulder the painful consequences of the confrontation. Our findings
indicate that previous conflicts were only resolved successfully by using traditional
mechanisms. The late premier Edward Sokoine is known to have resolved the same
conflict between the two groups in the late 70's by employing traditional means.
He requested the warring sides to breast-feed each other's babies. The event and
practice took place and relative peace was achieved for many years until matters
turned sore again in the mid 90's.
It is therefore recommended that a conflict resolution meeting is convened as
early as possible, bringing together traditional leaders of both sides. In this regard,
it is recommended that the people themselves be given the opportunity to choose
their representatives to the resolution meeting. All the villages in the conflict area
should be made to participate in the subject meeting. A neutral party that is
14
accepted by all conflicting sides should mediate. We recommend that politicians
be exempted from this important task. We also recommend that the subject
meeting takes place in a neutral territory, possibly in Karatu.
5.2 Dissolution of the Committee of Councillors
The team has observed that the existing Councillors committee enjoys little
respect by the Sonjo among other things, because of its composition and the
alleged partiality of some members in it. There are three Maasai and one Sonjo in
a committee of six. The Sonjo also complain that many members of the committee
do not understand the history of the conflict and cannot therefore be in a good
position to make informed decisions on the same. The committee has failed so far
to resolve the conflicts in the villages of Sale and Loliondo divisions and it is yet to
present a report to the council.
The research has also observed that the methodology employed by the committee
did not guarantee participation by local people. A member of the committee who
was interviewed indicated that the methodology employed was to call together
village land committees, village executive officers and traditional leaders of both
sides to agree on the boundaries. Some people interviewed contest this allegation,
it is said that the committee was literally imposing decisions and in some cases
coercing the differing sides to agree on its decisions. The team also observed that
in some villages the committee has set boundaries arbitrarily without taking into
account the views of the local communities. Failure to get the confidence of both
sides and complaints of its partiality and failure to finish its assignment in good
time, our recommendation that the committee be done away with in its entirety,
including nullifying demarcations that are said to have been put into place by the
same, is justified.
5.3 Re-demarcation of boundaries according to the Land and village Land Acts,
1999 (no.4 and 5, respectively).
We have detailed in this report that the boundaries that were put by IUCN, SRCS
and ADDO, have been a subject of heated contention and one of the registered
causes of the ensuing confrontation. The extent to which the demarcation was
done in a participatory manner is questionable. There is no evidence (not even
minutes of any meetings) to show that both sides agreed to the demarcation and
the boundaries set. The method employed to do the subject demarcation is even
contestable as to its legality. It appears that only technical people did the
demarcation with limited involvement of local people. The proper procedure is for
the villages to agree on the boundaries and then seek technical advice whenever
necessary.
The team recommends that boundaries be redrawn in a participatory manner and
following the procedures set down by the existing laws of the country. The Land
and village land acts, have detailed procedures for resolving complicated village
boundaries of the nature in question. We quote seriatim the relevant provisions of
law of the Village Land Act:
15
7(2) "Where a village claiming or occupying and using land as village land is unable
to agree with or is in dispute with a person or body… as to the boundaries of the
land which it is claiming or occupying and using as village land…the Minister shall,
on being satisfied that every effort has been made to try and reach an agreement
of the boundaries either-
(a) Appoint a person to act as a mediator between the village and the
person or body with which the village is unable to reach an agreement…
(b) Where the mediator reports to the Minister that despite his best
endeavours, he is unable to persuade the parties to the dispute to reach
a compromise on the boundaries, advise the Minister to appoint an
inquiry under section 18 of the Land Act 1999 to adjudicate and
demarcate the boundaries of that village land.''
The research team therefore recommends that the people themselves try to reach a
consensus as to the boundaries during the traditional dialogue suggested in 5(1) above.
In the event the two sides fail to reach a consensus, then procedures detailed in the
land and village Lands Acts will have to be employed. This will entail that the Minister
will have to appoint a mediator and when this fails, then the Minister will have no
other alternative but to appoint an inquiry to adjudicate and demarcate village
boundaries and the outcome of which will be conclusive and binding to both sides in
the conflict.
It is further recommended that the actual agreements of meetings deliberating on
boundaries should be documented for evidence as these will serve as points of
references in the event of future misunderstandings.
5.4 Implementing the dispute settlement mechanisms of the new land laws
The new land laws have introduced new mechanisms of settling land disputes. These
include the introduction of village Land Adjudication Committees, Village land
Councils, Ward Development Committees and other higher organs for land dispute
resolutions. These organs are yet to be formed in many parts of the country, including
Ngorongoro District. The virtue of these instruments of conflict settlement is that they
will be established by local communities themselves and will employ customary
methods of dispute settlement. The research team recommends that these
instruments be put in place in the whole of Ngorongoro District, but more so
expediently in the conflict zones.
5.5 Awareness raising on the new land laws
The research observed that the new land laws and the procedures that are created
by them, are not known by many communities in Ngorongoro. The awareness of the
same is lacking completely in the Sonjo villages, while limited understating has
been given to a few Maasai villages.
The research team therefore strongly recommends that the District and NGO's
dealing with land rights forge a common resolve to undertake deliberate measures
to carry paralegal trainings to make people aware of the subject laws. It is highly
recommended that both groups (Sonjo and Maasai) be trained together as opposed
16
to training them separately. This is thought by the research team as a means of
actually bringing them together to build a sense of trust and mutuality.
5.6 Joint land use plans
The research team also recommends that along with the raising of awareness on
the new land laws, there is also a need for the villages in conflict to have proper
land use plans. Land use plans have the advantage of ascertaining and demarcating
different areas that are set for designate purposes. The existing situation without
land use plans is such that villages have not set areas specific for farming, grazing,
among other uses. The beauty of land use planning under the new land laws, is
the fact that neighbouring villages can make joint land use plans. Joint land use
plans are especially important in the conflicting areas of the villages of Sale and
Loliondo divisions. It will in this case be possible for example, for the villages of
kisangiro and Engusero- Sambu to decide to have a common grazing land and thus
relieve the tension they currently have on their frontiers.
5.7 Disarmament
The presence of loose and illegal small arms in the District cannot be divorced
from the present conflict. It is therefore recommended that the government takes
deliberate measures to disarm those in possession of small arms.
5.8 Police Posts in the conflict areas
The research team has observed that Ngorongoro District has very few police
officers compared to the size of the area and the amount of conflicts that occur
from time to time. During the July 2004 conflict for example, the District
Commissioner had to seek the assistance of the prison department and local militia
(‘Mgambo'), for want of enough policemen. In fact the failure to prevent the
burning of property in Enguserosambu is attributable to this fact. The three
policemen who were entrusted with preventing more conflict had to run as the
people involved in the battle outnumbered them.
The research therefore recommends that additional policemen be located at the
District headquarters but more importantly, that new police posts be constructed
near the border of the conflicting sides.
5.9 Resolving problems related to the border with Kenya
Issues around and related to the border with Kenya have been sited as one of the
causes of conflict. There are complaints that land pressures in Kenya have had a
significant bearing on the number of illegal immigrants who cross the border,
hence increase pressure on land on the Tanzania side. There is a need for the
government to enforce immigration regulations to make sure that the already
17
limited land resources in Sale and Loliondo Divisions are not competed away by
foreigners.
6. Conclusion
The Loita Batemi conflict is fundamentally a Resource Based Conflict (RBC); even
thought it thrives from hitherto prevalent deep ethnic hatreds between the sides.
Resource Based Conflicts are on the rampage throughout the whole country. The Kilosa
conflict of 2000 where more than 30 innocent lives were lost is just one but ‘live'
example. The symptoms of these conflicts are not hard to see. As the wise would say,
prevention is better than cure. The government and other stakeholders should
therefore address these conflicts before they escalate into proportions that are
difficult to control. Issues on and around land administration and governance, are at
the core of these conflicts. Many Tanzanians still occupy lands under customary
arrangements; conflict from them should to that extent be traditional in orientation.
The coming into force of the village land act of 1999 and the codification of traditional
mechanism of dispute settlements in land are welcome developments. The
interference by the central government in the demarcation and management of village
lands is something that should be done way with to give villages a say in the
management and governance of their lands.

Source:http://www.hakiardhi.org/HA-Docs/REPORT ON LOLIONDO.pdf