Online Reporter
O Gutu
THE Government’s announcement on 7 May that it is returning 67 farms covered under Bilateral Investment Promotion and Protection Agreements (BIPAs) has triggered a wave of criticism, much of it loud, emotional, and, unfortunately, deeply misinformed. Some have gone as far as claiming that President Mnangagwa is “reversing the land reform programme”, while others have invoked the late President Robert Mugabe’s legacy for political effect. Yet, once the noise is stripped away, one fact remains: the Government’s action is entirely lawful, rational and firmly grounded in the national interest.
What is unfolding in the public discourse points either to political opportunism or a fundamental misunderstanding of the legal framework governing BIPA farms. These farms are protected under binding international agreements, which Zimbabwe entered into voluntarily. The legal position is clear — where land covered by BIPAs was acquired, the affected investors are entitled to full compensation for both the land and improvements. This obligation is not discretionary; it is a binding commitment that pre-dates current political debates, including those surrounding Constitutional Amendment Bill No. 3.
Where Government does not have the immediate financial capacity to meet full compensation obligations, the law provides for alternative remedies, including land restoration. Restoration, however, does not imply a return of the exact same property to the former owner. Rather, it involves providing land of equivalent value or, where necessary, alternative land as part of a structured compensation process. Such decisions are not made arbitrarily. They are guided by thorough audits and assessments that take into account the realities on the ground. This approach is consistent with established international practices and should not be misconstrued as a political concession.
It is, therefore, striking that some of the loudest critics of the current policy are the same voices that have consistently called for strict adherence to the law in other areas, particularly in relation to constitutional reforms. When Government acts in accordance with its legal obligations on BIPA farms, the reaction from these quarters shifts to accusations of betrayal. This inconsistency underscores a worrying tendency to approach national issues through partisan lenses rather than principles of legality and national interest.
For farmers across the country, there is no basis for alarm. The suggestion that this decision signals a reversal of land reform or a threat to land tenure security is unfounded. On the contrary, by honouring its international obligations, Zimbabwe is taking decisive steps to strengthen investor confidence and rebuild credibility on the global stage. This is a critical component of the broader economic recovery agenda, particularly in agriculture, where access to capital and external financing remains constrained.
The decision also reflects strategic foresight. By resolving long-standing obligations tied to BIPAs, the Government is positioning the country to re-engage with international financial institutions and attract investment into key sectors. Agriculture, which remains the backbone of the economy, stands to benefit significantly from increased capital inflows, improved productivity and enhanced infrastructure development. This is not a political manoeuvre; it is an economic imperative.
Importantly, land reform as a foundational policy remains intact. The core objective of redistributing land to empower indigenous Zimbabweans has not been altered. What is being addressed is a specific category of land governed by international agreements, and doing so in a lawful manner strengthens rather than undermines the legitimacy of the entire reform programme.
At its core, this development highlights a Government willing to make difficult but necessary decisions in the interest of long-term national stability and growth. Upholding the rule of law, honouring international commitments and fostering an environment conducive to investment are all essential pillars of sustainable development.
Zimbabwe’s path forward lies not in retreating from reform, but in consolidating it through responsible governance, legal compliance and strategic engagement with the global community. In that context, the return of BIPA-covered farms is not a reversal — it is a recalibration grounded in law, pragmatism and the pursuit of national progress.
