stolenlandstolenfuture

a report on land grabbing in Cambodia and honduras

DanChurChaiD (Folkekirkens ndhjlp) October 2011

This paper was wriTTen byeditor: Malene haakanssonMain author on Cambodia for sale: nadia saraciniMain author on The curse of biofuel in honduras: Katja Merete JarnumOther contributors: signe asbirk, eva pineda hansen, Klavs birger wulff, Linda nordahl Jakobsen, Mette Lund srensen, Malene haakanssonDesign anne Mousten, DanChurchaid

This publication is copyright but the text may be used free of charge for thepurposes of advocacy, campaigning, education, and research, provided thatthe source is acknowledged in full. For copying in any other circumstances, or for re-use in other publications, or fortranslation or adaptation, DanChurchaid must be consulted.

For further information on the issues raised in this report please e-mail. The information in this publication is correct at the time of going to press.

pubLisheD by DanChurchaid nrregade 15 DK-1165 Copenhagen K Denmark

email: mail@dca.dk phone: +45 3315 2800 Fax: +45 3318 7816

DanChurchaid is a Danish ngO assisting the worlds poorest to lead a life in dignity. aid is given regardless of race, creed, political or religious

affiliation. Certified by humanitarian accountability partnership and member of aCT alliance

ExEcutivE summary 4

cambodia for salE introduction 7

From land use to economic land concessions 8Drastic increase of land grabbing makes the poor poorer 9weak implementation of land law fails the most vulnerable 10expropriation and evictions 11widespread and serious human rights abuses 12

stakeholders 13Local communities and civil society organisations 13government institutions 14international donors 15

Case sTuDy Koh Kong sugar plantations 16introduction 16impact on local communities 17where is the sugar going? 18Violations of Law and human rights 18The villagers demands 19responses from the eu 19Conclusion 21

arTiCLe i hope i can get my land back 22

Lessons Learnt 24

thE cursE of biofuEl in hondurasintroduction 25

From being Central americas breadbasket to importer of food 26

Failed Land reforms 28escalation of human rights violations 29

Case sTuDy The bajo agun Valley 30The peasants struggle for land 31Violence increases 32The african palm adventure, the eu, wb and CDM in bajo agun 33Trading CO2 from conflicted land 34Flawed approval of CDM projects 35risk of violating human rights and worsening food security 35

arTiCLe we are reclaiming what belongs to us 37

Lessons Learnt 40

rEcommEndations 41

4executive summary

executive summary

The global rush for land in developing countries has a devastating impact on poverty reduction. invest-ment in large-scale plantations and concessions frequently increases food insecurity for the poor and violates their rights instead of contributing to devel-opment, as documented in this report. an area estimated to be between the size of the united Kingdom and western europe (201-2272 mil-lion hectares) has been sold or leased, mostly to in-ternational investors, in recent years. The land grabbing often takes place in food inse-cure developing countries, where the original users or owners of the land are poor smallholder farmers or people using communal land. The sold or leased lands are mainly being used for producing cash crops, food or biofuel, and are becoming increasingly profit-able as a consequence of the crisis in the financial, food, and energy sector.The land grabbers are mainly international corpora-tions, businesses and institutions, but also national investors often supported by international actors in the form of investment, loans or trade agreements.in this report, land grabbing is defined as land ac-quisitions or concessions, where one or more of the following factors are present3:Violation of human rights, and particularly the

equal rights of women

no involvement of free, prior and informed con-sent of the affected land-users

not based on a thorough assessment of the con-sequences, or are in disregard of social, economic and environmental impacts, including the way they are gendered

not based on transparent contracts that specify clear and binding commitments about activities, employment and benefits sharing

not based on effective democratic planning, inde-pendent oversight and meaningful participation

The focus of this report is land grabbing in Cambo-dia and honduras. it is based on DanChurchaids experience from many years of development work in the two countries through local partners. The report documents how affected communities have lost their livelihoods because of land grabbing by na-tional and international business corporations. Local communities have not been consulted and they have received little or no compensation for their loss. The communities have been either evicted from their land and have faced systematic human rights viola-tions or violent - and in some cases fatal - conflicts have risen resulting from land conflict.Cambodia has experienced a dramatic increase in land grabbing in recent years. almost 56 percent of

1 Estimates by International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) 2005-2009. Towards a better understanding of global land grabbing: an editorial introduction, Saturnino M Borras Jr. et al., 24 March 2011, Journal of Peasant Studies, 2 Estimate of land that has been either sold or leased since 2001 according to research by the Land Matrix Partnership, Land and Power, Oxfam

Briefing paper, 22 September 20113 Tirana Declaration:Securing land access for the poor in times of intensified natural resources competition, International Land Coalition, 2011,

http://www.landcoalition.org/sites/default/files/aom11/Tirana_Declaration_ILC_2011_ENG.pdf

5executive summary

all arable land is given to private companies for agro-industrial use4. The land grabbing has resulted in loss of livelihoods for local communities. within Cam-bodia, there is concern that the european unions preferential trade agreement everything but arms (eba), is fuelling the alarming land grabbing devel-opment. Despite the objective of the eba to support development in the least developed countries the agreement does makes it more profitable for Cam-bodias elite to grab land from small holder farmers. The eu has so far refused to follow its own proceed-ings to ensure that human rights are being upheld in its trade agreements.in the case of honduras, the global rush for produc-tion of biofuel and access to carbon credits is making it profitable for national and international business to maintain the unequal distribution of land between honduras poor and the elite. it also makes it pos-sible for international institutions, corporations and donors to support domestic land grabbing or the status quo of unequal land ownership where serious human rights abuses occur. To this date, there is no global human rights mechanism incorporated in the global carbon market that can prevent countries from buying carbon credits from CDM-projects in develop-ing countries, which include land grabbing tactics or land issues where human rights are violated.

For investment in land in developing countries to contribute to development and improve food securi-ty for the poor international institutions, donors and national governments must include communities whose livelihoods are affected in decision-making, listen to their concerns and respect their legal rights. human rights safeguards should always be incorpo-rated into land deals, and existing laws designed to protect land rights should be fully implemented. international development actors like Denmark have a vital role to play to ensure that their trade and aid policies do not contribute to land grabbing that in-creases food insecurity for the poor and thereby undermines years of international development aid and efforts.

DanChurchaid strongly recommends the Danish government to:ensure that Danish bilateral and multilateral devel-opment aid will not encourage land grabbing locally, nationally and internationally but further the reali-sation of human rights and the right to food. Mecha-nisms, standards and monitoring schemes must be developed to ensure that Danish Development aid does not contribute to increasing food insecurity in developing countries and thereby undermine Dani-Das overall policy of poverty reduction:

ensure the inclusion of recommendations and requirements with respect to the observance of human rights in bilateral negotiations with the honduran and Cambodian governments

support the proposal in the ongoing un climate talks regarding a CDM reform to include safe-guards against human rights violations

work actively to put the following recommendations on the european unions (eu) agenda and push for implementation in the Danish eu presidency in 2012 and beyond:

ensure that eu policies do not encourage illegal land grabbing locally, nationally and internation-ally

eus trade policies must comply with the prin-ciple of policy Coherence for Development in ac-cordance with the Lissabon Treatys article 208, which state that the eus goal of fighting pov-erty in its development policy must not be under-mined by other eu policies and be in accordance with the Lissabon Treatys goal of advancing hu-man rights as a fundamental principle of the eu art.2 and art. 21)

human rights safeguard provisions must be im-plemented within european preferential trade agreements and transparent monitoring schemes must be developed to ensure the respect of hu-man rights including the right to food

the european Commission must include stronger

4 Cambodian League for the promotion and defence of human rights (LICADHO)

6executive summary

social criteria in the certification systems in the eus renewable energy directive and monitor the impact on food security and food prices

the eu supports the proposal in the ongoing un climate talks regarding a CDM reform to include safeguards against human rights violations

develop a complaint mechanism accessible for civil society that can make the eu more respon-sive and accountable to concerns about the im-pacts of its policies

continue funding for programmes in Cambodia and honduras that promote good governance, human rights, and social accountability

in the Cambodian sugar case work actively to make the european Commission comply with its obligation to inform the generalised preference Committee of the human rights violations taking place in sre ambel and botumsakor Districts of Koh Kong province and launch an investigation into the matter

Denmark and the eu should withhold consent for the association agreement between the eu and Central america until it can be guaranteed that the agreement is coherent with the respect for human rights and the achievement of the Millen-nium Development goals

7cambodia for sale

around 80 percent of Cambodias 15 million popu-lation depends on land and natural resources for a livelihood. Only 6.5 million of Cambodias 18.1 million hectares are considered arable. rural households typically have a small homestead plus additional plots (from 1-3 hectares) for cultivating rice. subsis-tence agriculture relies greatly on non-timber forest products, fish and other small animals for additional food and income. This hand-to-mouth existence means that loss of agricultural land and/or loss of access to natural resources lead directly to poverty and poor health. Many ngOs use land ownership or

introductionaccess to land as an indicator of poverty and it re-mains the most important safety net for Cambodias poor. Cambodias recent history of conflict, massive dis-placement and forced collectivisation, followed by a rapid transition to a market economy and economic integration regionally and internationally, has had unique and unprecedented impacts on land use which, in a context of a country where land gover-nance still needs to be improved, have led to an es-calation of conflicts over land and vulnerability of the poor to land grabbing and forced evictions. as

cambodia for sale

photo dan church aid

8cambodia for sale

increasing numbers face land conflicts and insecu-rity, there are far-reaching implications for food se-curity and climate change adaptation, housing and employment, health and education, and, ultimately, for social equity and sustainability of Cambodias development. The magnitude of Cambodias land problems have been highlighted by the united nations Development programme (unDp)5 and many other organisations.6 Land grabbing often leaves people destitute and without effective access to legal or other remedies. it mainly affects the socially and economically most vul-nerable, and it adds to Cambodias growing inequality by divesting people of a livelihood and resulting in the creation of segregated relocation sites where people have no access to a means to earn a living.

Most evictions contravene recognised human rights standards, with lack of prior notice, inadequate or no consultation or participation in decision-making for those affected, absence of information sharing, and lack of housing alternatives as common problems. The use of excessive force, including military force, to carry out evictions is a disturbing trend.7 women suffer particularly as a result of losing their homes, livelihoods, relationships and support systems re-sulting in breakdowns of kinship ties, physical and psychological trauma and even increased morbidity and mortality. also of serious consequence is the fact that evictions increase the vulnerability of women to further acts of violence.8

5 Expanding Choices for Rural Cambodia: UNDP Country Report, 20076 See especially Land is Life, NGO Forum Land and Livelihoods Programme, 2009; and also reports by LICADHO7 See for example http://www.licadho-cambodia.org/articles/20100402/109/index.html8 A Cambodian Guide to Defending Land and Housing Rights, Bridges Across Borders Southeast Asia, Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions,

International Accountability Project, 2009

from land usE to Economic land concEssionsLand ownership in Cambodia has historically been tied to land use rather than formal title. Land was acquired through cultivation (although it theoretically belonged to the countrys rulers). as recently the 1960s, popu-lation density in much of rural Cambodia was low, allowing families to expand the land area they culti-vated as they grew, clearing the countrys extensive forests without significant ecological impacts. Land was not traded. attempts by French colonists (1800s-1930) and the post colonial government (1953-1975) to introduce formal private ownership were partially successful in the rice growing plains but unsuccess-ful in upland and forest areas. however, even where settled agriculture was the norm, the notion of land as private property contrasted with traditional owner-ship practices.Civil war in the 1960s and 70s caused thousands to abandon their lands and seek refuge in phnom penh. The Khmer rouge takeover (1975-1979) moved most of the population to rural agricultural production

camps, uprooted communities from their traditional lands, expropriated all property, destroyed most land records and collectivised all the lands. Many people fled to refugee camps or sought asylum overseas. af-ter the ouster of the Khmer rouge in 1979, rural com-munities returned to their villages and resumed farm-ing on whatever lands were available, but all land was still considered state property. recognition of private ownership of land by families and individuals began again in the mid 1980s. although pre-1975 land claims by returnees were not recognised, land distribution in rural areas during that period was relatively equal. in the 1990s, with the development of a market econ-omy, an unregulated land market started to grow. The Constitution adopted in 1993 provided for legal private and public state ownership of land, and a Land Law was introduced in 1992, which allowed people to apply for land certificates to confirm occupancy and use rights. however, only a small proportion of ap-plicants received formal land certificates. During the

9cambodia for sale

same period, in an attempt to stimulate private in-vestment, economic concessions to private compa-nies started to be granted on forest and state lands. These concessions were outside existing laws, and contributed to dispossessing rural communities from farm and forest lands9.

Drastic increase of land grabbing makes the poor poorerThe available statistics do not reflect the full extent of current problems of land grabbing, since all cases are not documented and many smaller incidents go unreported. however, although difficult to quantify conclusively, there is overwhelming evidence that land insecurity and land grabbing has grown mark-edly in the last two decades, and that evictions car-ried out in the name of development contribute little to local economies10. a parallel report on land and housing rights in Cambodia describes the current con-text of rapid but unplanned economic growth, spiral-ling land prices and speculation, corruption related to land deals, and the absence of secure land tenure for low income-households. in urban areas redevel-opment has been a major cause of forced evictions. in phnom penh alone, 133,000 people, or 11 percent of the population, were estimated to have been evicted from their homes between 1990 and 2009. rural landlessness, often caused by forced evictions, rose from 13 percent in 1997 to between 20 and 25 percent in 2007.11 The people most vulnerable to land grabbing are those without formal title to their land. Formal title does give people some security and legal claim in the courts, although even people with land titles can be evicted. Communities with no formal title often become vulnerable to land grabbing when infrastructure (particularly roads) makes their land more attractive to commercial investors. rural land grabbing has taken many forms, including

appropriation of land for development projects such as roads. however, the most extensive land grabbing is due to economic land concessions (eLCs), which are the focus of this report. eLCss involve the granting of state private Land to private companies for agro-industrial exploitation.12 according to the Cambodian ngO Forum Land infor-mation Centre, the majority of recent cases of large-scale land conflicts involving eLCs in Cambodia have been between forest-dependent communities and eLCs, although agricultural land is also disputed. battambang, preah sihanouk and Kandal are the worst affected provinces. in 2007, over 943,069 hect-ares of land in rural Cambodia were in the possession of private companies in a total of 59 eLCs for the de-velopment of agro-industrial plantations. This con-stituted approximately 5.2 percent of the total land area in Cambodia (14.5 percent of arable land). The provinces most affected were Kratie, stung Treng, Kompong speu, ratanakiri and Kompong Chamg. These statistics excluded numerous smaller (under 1000 hectares) eLCs granted at the provincial level, for which information on numbers and ownership had not been disclosed. The majority land grabbing cases linked to eLCs in-volve the poor against the rich and powerful, with government officials and military frequently im-plicated, often in collusion with private companies (both Cambodian and foreign). Of the 59 conces-sions mentioned in a un report, 36 were granted in favour of foreign business interests or prominent political and business figures.13 a large number of economic land concessions have been granted in fa-vour of prominent Cambodian political and business figures, including senators and oknhas14. The most recent data gathered by LiCaDhO indi-cates that 2,077,701 hectares (almost 56 percent o arable land) are given over to eLCs (with almost as

9 Land and Resource Alienation in Cambodia, Shalmali Guttal, Focus on the Global South, 200610 Land Grabbing and Poverty in Cambodia: The Myth of Development, LICADHO, May 200911 UN Capital Development Fund (UNCDF), Local Development Outlook Cambodia, April 201012 Land Grabbing and Poverty in Cambodia: The Myth of Development LICADHO, May 200913 United Nations Cambodia Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Economic land concessions in Cambodia: A human rights perspec-

tive, June 200714 Oknha is a title given to any generous person who contributes $100,000 to the State, either in cash or materials. The title is bestowed by the

King, at the request of the Royal Government of Cambodia

10cambodia for sale

much designated to mining concessions which are also a huge concern). encroachment on agricultural and grazing land, and resulting loss of livelihoods, is the most commonly-voiced issue of concern for com-munities, and arises in relation to almost all active concessions15.

weak implementation of land law fails the most vulnerableThe Land Law passed in 2001 is the legislation most relevant to this discussion. Most households have traditionally relied on various documents issued by local authorities (sometimes called soft title) to prove their claims to the property. prior to 2001 a small number of land owners did have formal or hard title to their land, but this was not widespread. The 2001 Land Law provided for much more widespread granting of individual and collective titles to land, in-troducing a cadastral system whereby land titles are centrally registered and confirm that people who oc-cupied land for at least five years prior to 31 august 2001, and meet a number of other conditions, have rights which can be transferred to full ownership. such possession rights formed the legal basis of

the land titling and registration program that com-menced in the following year, which should protect legal possessors from eviction until their land rights are determined through an adjudication process and full ownership is conferred (the 2001 Land Law stipulates that expropriation may only be carried out by the state in the public interest after fair and just compensation has been paid). however, the imple-mentation of this and other provisions of the 2001 Land Law has been fraught with difficulties and has not, on the whole, resulted in favourable outcomes for the poor.16

The 2001 Land Law also authorises the granting of land concessions responding to either social or eco-nomic purposes. Other kinds of concessions, includ-ing mining, fishing, industrial development and port concessions, do not fall within its scope but do also contribute to land grabbing. eLCs must be based on a specific legal document issued by the competent authority prior to the occupation of the land, and must be registered with the Ministry of Land Man-agement, urban planning and Construction. eLCs can only be granted over state private land for a max-imum duration of 99 years. They do not establish ownership rights over land, but concessionaires are vested with most rights associated with ownership during the term of the contract. eLCs are not supposed to exceed 10,000 hectares, and concessions granted prior to the passage of the Land Law are supposed to be reduced to comply with this limit, although an exemption may be granted if the reduction will compromise exploitation in prog-ress. The grant of concessions in several locations, jointly exceeding the 10,000 hectare size limit, in fa-vour of the same person(s) or different legal entities controlled by the same person(s) is not allowed by law but, as the following case study shows, it hap-pens anyway.The sub-Decree on economic Land Concessions, ad-opted in December 2005, was an important advance in establishing the legal and regulatory framework for the granting and management of eLCs. it in-

15 United Nations Cambodia Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Economic land concessions in Cambodia: A human rights perspec-tive, June 2007

16 Land Titling in Cambodia: Lessons from the Formalizing Inequality, Natalie Bugalski and David Pred, 2010

photo dan church aid

11cambodia for sale

cludes requirements to conduct public consultations and environmental and social impact assessments. however, these provisions have not been properly implemented and enforced; existing concessions have not been reviewed; and economic land conces-sions have continued to be granted over forested ar-eas and indigenous land, in violation of the law. The multi-donor-supported Land Management and administration project (LMap) ran from 2002 until 2009 as the first phase of the governments land re-form program. Over the projects duration key parts of the legal framework were developed, the technical capacity of Land Ministry staff was strengthened, and an estimated 1.3 million titles were issued. how-ever, some analysts have raised concerns that the project failed to address fundamental inequities in the control and management of land, with the re-sult that it did not improve tenure security for those most vulnerable to displacement.17

The key problems identified included: areas likely to be disputed or of unclear sta-

tus were excluded, but these terms were not defined in the project design documents, allow-ing sub-national authorities in charge of select-ing adjudication zones to arbitrarily exclude areas sought after by powerful domestic actors and for-eign investors. some of these authorities have also played a significant role in land grabbing and forced evictions.

The selection of adjudication areas largely oc-curred in an opaque manner, without information about the process being made available to the public, nor consultations with affected persons. as a result, many thousands of households that lie within portions of land excluded from the land titling system have been evicted without their tenure status ever being assessed.

a parallel process of state land classification and mapping has not succeeded in establishing a co-ordinated and transparent land management sys-tem. in the absence of a transparent state land classification, attempts to register private land

through legal process are easily thwarted. people are routinely accused of being illegally settled on state land, yet these claims are being made outside the legal framework. at the same time, authorities are able to arbitrarily and improperly classify land to serve private interests.

a resettlement policy Framework was to be ap-plied in the event of eviction from state land re-sulting from the LMap adjudication process. The policy required that evictions should be avoided whenever possible, and in cases in which they are unavoidable, proper compensation and resettle-ment options must be offered to affected persons in order to ensure that, at a minimum, their living standards are maintained. however, the policy is rarely, if ever, applied properly.

These problems have facilitated commercial devel-opment projects, including the granting of large-scale economic land concessions, and have led to forced displacement, land alienation, and the loss of residential land; and they have deepened structural inequality in land tenure and administration in Cam-bodia.

expropriation and evictionsThe Cambodian legal framework for land expropria-tion includes the 1993 Constitution which provides

cambodian land law 2001There are two broad categories of land:1. state property, which includes state

public property, such as forests which are supposed to be protected from commercial exploitation, and state private property designated for economic and social devel-opment (including redistribution for social purposes)

2. private property, which includes land that can be owned by individuals and communi-ties or which is legally possessed by individ-uals under the Land Law of 2001

17 Land Titling In Cambodia: Lessons from the Land Management and Administration Project, Dr Natalie Bugalski, Marck Grimsditch and David Pred, 2011. See also UNCDF: Local Development Outlook. Cambodia, April 2010

12cambodia for sale

that the state may expropriate private property only in the public interest. The 2001 Land Law reiterates this requirement as follows: no person shall be deprived of his ownership, unless it is in the public interest. both set a standard of fair and just com-pensation for state expropriation, and both explic-itly require compensation to be made before expro-priation starts. Despite these safeguards, there has been a longstanding lack of clarity in relation to who is entitled to compensation, what compensation is made, when the compensation is paid, and what de-termines the amount of compensation, leading to highly unsatisfactory outcomes.18 a Law on expropri-ation was passed in 2010 and this provides for fair and just deprivation of legal rights to private prop-erty to serve the national and public interest and develop physical infrastructures. This law also pro-vides for compensation in advance of expropriation/eviction and in theory should ensure that expropria-tion of land only takes place if it is considered to be in the public interest, and then only if adequate compensation is paid. in practice, compensation is rarely adequate. it gen-erally does not reflect the true market value of ex-propriated land, and is often paid late, if at all. as an alternative, displaced communities are often offered poor quality land which cannot be farmed. some-times they are merely evicted and left displaced. The Law on expropriation has also been used to justify evictions even when there is no genuine public inter-est at stake. access to justice and impartial dispute resolution mechanisms for the poor affected by land grabbing is extremely limited. according to the Cambodian ngO Forum Land information Centre, 70 percent of land conflicts documented in 2009 remained unre-solved. The two main mechanisms for resolving land disputes are the courts and the Cadastral Commis-sion (depending on the status of the land in ques-

tion). however, ngO Forum reports that people make their complaints through a wide variety of different channels (including provincial authorities and even the royal palace).19

people often settle for a partial resolution achieved with the intervention of local authorities rather than go to court, since the courts generally settle com-plaints about land grabbing on behalf of the de-fendants. Lack of accountability towards the poor combined with the prevalence of corrupt practices in relation to land deals has benefited a powerful mi-nority while alienating the poor and contributing to growing inequality. in a number of cases, criminal charges have been filed against community activists who have been organising their communities and protesting against the impact of concessions. yet the judicial system has not been used to uphold the rights of communities, and companies who infringe the law have not been held accountable for their ac-tions.20

widespread and serious human rights abuses The royal government of Cambodia is a party to key human rights treaties, including the international Covenant on economic, social and Cultural rights, international Covenant on Civil and political rights and international Convention on the elimination of all Forms of racial Discrimination. These treaties, together with the universal Declaration on human rights, guarantee the rights to own property and not be arbitrarily deprived of property; to an adequate standard of living, including food and housing; to self-determination and not to be deprived of ones means of subsistence; to freedoms of expression and assembly; to equality before the law and equal protection of the law; and to an effective remedy. The Constitution21 of the Kingdom of Cambodia in-corporates into domestic law the human rights guar-

18 Expropriation Laws and Practices: Cambodia, published by the Asian Development Bank (www.adb.org/Documents/Reports/Capacity- Building.../chap4.pdf )19 Statistical Analysis of Land Disputes Occurring in Cambodia, 2009 Land Information Centre of the NGO Forum, 201020 United Nations Cambodia Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Economic land concessions in Cambodia: A human rights perspec-

tive, June 2007 21 http://www.bigpond.com.kh/Council_of_jurists/Constit/cons001g.htm

13cambodia for sale

antees contained in the universal Declaration of human rights and key human rights treaties, and specifically protects Cambodian citizens rights to own land and freedoms of expression and assembly. Despite these commitments and recent progress in the passage of legislative measures to uphold rights to land and protect natural resources, Cambodias poor continue to be forced from land which is legally theirs. The un special representative for human

rights in Cambodia has concluded that widespread and serious human rights abuses have been commit-ted in connection with economic land concessions in Cambodia, including those for sugarcane planta-tions22. The abuses described in the case study below constitute violations of rights to self-determination, including the right not to be deprived of ones means of subsistence; the right to work; the right to food; and the right to adequate housing.

22 Economic Land Concessions in Cambodia, A Human Rights Perspective, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), Special Representative of the Secretary-General for human rights in Cambodia, June 2007

stakEholdErsThere are numerous stakeholders who are directly and indirectly involved in the land grabbing issue in Cambodia. below is a list of primary stakeholders, which include international donors such as the eu-ropean union.

Local communities and civil society organisationsThe people most vulnerable to land grabbing are those without formal title to their land. The people most vulnerable to land grabbing are those with-out formal title to their land. Formal title does give people some security and legal claim in the courts, although even people with land titles can be evicted. Communities with no formal title often become vul-nerable to land grabbing when infrastructure (par-ticularly roads) makes their land more attractive to commercial investors.

cambodian lEaguE for thE promotion and dEfEnsE of human rights (LiCaDhO): a Cambo-dian human rights ngO which documents land rights violations and provides practical and legal support to affected communities. in partnership with bridges across borders Cambodia, the Community peace-building network, and Community Legal education Center (CLeC), it has launched the Cambodian Clean sugar Campaign, working on the european Commis-sions everything but arms trade policy and its

relevant human rights safeguards in response to the issues created by Cambodian sugar exports.

adhoc: another Cambodian human rights ngO with a strong presence in communities affected by land grabbing. it works with local authorities where pos-sible to try to advocate for economic land conces-sions to be implemented in accordance with the law and with genuine citizens participation in the pro-cess. aDhOC tries to launch a community-based re-sponse as soon as information is available about an economic land concession.

ngo forum on cambodia: a ngO network work-ing to influence the policies and practices of govern-ments, donors, investors and relevant stakeholders to ensure that land rights and tenure security of the poor and vulnerable groups are recognised and re-spected. ngO Forum operates a Land information Centre (LiC) to collect information related to land and natural resources issues, along with the documenta-tion of land and forest cases, in response to the lack of data and information being collected nationally about land disputes and resolution processes, and in order to advance understanding of trends. The ngO Forum coordinates, along with the Cooperation Com-mittee for Cambodia and MeDiCaM (other ngO net-works in Cambodia), the production of ngO position papers on the Cambodia Development Cooperation

14cambodia for sale

Forum (CDCF) Joint Monitoring indicators, through which the royal government of Cambodias prog-ress in a number of key areas including land reform is monitored.

land and housing working group: this Cam-bodia-based ngO task force is composed of border-lands Co-operative, bridges across borders south east asia (babsea), Cambodian League for the pro-motion and Defense of human rights (LiCaDhO), Centre for housing rights and evictions, Community Legal education Centre (CLeC), housing rights Task Force (hrTF), sahmakum Teang Tnaut (sTT), and the ngO Forum in Cambodia. its focus has been on the struggles of communities affected by eviction in phnom penh.

housing rights task forcE: a coalition of 13 ngOs created in 2003 working to prevent forced evic-tions and promote housing rights in Cambodia.

thE cambodian human rights action com-mittEE (ChraC): a coalition of 21 ngOs working for the promotion and the respect of human rights, de-mocracy and rule of law.

bridgEs across bordErs cambodia (babC): babC has been very active on land rights issues and particularly in monitoring the resettlement of up to 4000 families who are likely to be displaced by the aDb-financed railways rehabilitation project.

government institutionsthE cambodian govErnmEnt tEchnical working group (Twg): Twg brings together gov-ernment and donor governments and has focused on technical issues of land management, such as the multi-donor supported Land Management and administration project (LMap), the Land alloca-tion for social and economic Development (LaseD) programme, the development of the sub-Decree on state Land Management and the sub-Decree on economic Land Concessions. according to some analysts, this group never addresses land conflicts or violations of indigenous community rights.

ministry of agriculturE, forEstry and fish-EriEs (MaFF): MaFF leads on policy-making, devel-opment planning and implementation for the agri-cultural sector, and on land use, and is tasked with improving living standards; ensuring the stability of the ecological system with respect to agriculture; de-veloping technical skills and knowledge in relation to efficient use of resources; coordination and coopera-tion with the sector, ngOs and other organisations; contributing to attracting investment and develop-ing exports; and contributing to pricing policy. The Forestry and Fisheries administrations also come under MaFF responsibilities.

ministry of land managEmEnt, urban plan-ning and construction (MLMupC): MLMupC is responsible for land management and cadastral af-fairs, the development of land policy, land registra-tion, distribution and administration of land titles, and it also has the oversight of the granting of social Land Concessions. it includes the Cadastral Com-mission responsible for demarcation and registra-tion of land and for the resolution of land disputes under which provincial and Municipal Cadastral Of-fices conduct surveys in coordination with other local authorities and maintain the Land registers. There is also a Council for Land policy a group of Minis-tries working on new legislation being monitored by the ngO Forum and some donors.

national authority for land disputE rEso-lution: this authority was created in 2006 by the royal Decree and is supposed to have jurisdiction over cases which are beyond the jurisdiction of the Cadastral Commissions. however, analysts argue that according to the law there are no cases beyond the jurisdiction of the Cadastral Commission or the courts.

tEchnical sEcrEtariat for Economic land concEssions: the sub-decree on economic land concessions (eLCs) created a Technical secretariat, to be composed of representatives of eight Ministries and government institutions, which is responsible for maintaining a logbook to monitor the granting

15cambodia for sale

and implementation of eLCs. Contracting authori-ties are required to review existing economic land concessions with the support of the Technical secre-tariat, including a review of contractual compliance, land use fees and other revenue from contracts; a public consultation to solicit comments on conces-sion activities within communes where concessions are located; a request for land regularisation; and a request for the voluntary reduction of economic land concessions exceeding 10,000 hectares.

international donorsabout 50 percent of Cambodias national budget comes from international aid, and there are numer-ous foreign governments that provide bilateral aid to Cambodias state institutions. The asia Develop-ment bank, the iMF and the world bank also pro-vide large sums of official development assistance and loans to the Cambodian government mainly for private sector, institutional and infra-structural de-velopment.

thE world bank (wb): supported the multi-do-nor supported Land Management and administra-tion project (LMap) between 2002 and 2009, includ-ing around the boeung Kak lake area of phnom penh, which was classified as state land in a flawed adjudi-cation process, effectively categorising longstanding local residents with unarguable possession rights as illegal squatters, and excluding them from the land titling process. in august 2009, prompted by lobbying from land rights activists, the world bank requested a moratorium on eviction of these residents. a sub-sequent world bank inspection panel, called for by activists on behalf of the lake residents, confirmed that residents had been denied both proper adjudi-cation of their land rights and their entitlement to protection under the LMap resettlement policy. The panels investigation report, released in March 2011, highlighted the inadequacies of LMaps implemen-tation, including how land titling had been limited

to those areas where land is less contested.23 subse-quent protests by residents, supported by lobbying by ngOs and other actors, seemed in august 2011 to have succeeded in winning some concessions from the Cambodian governmnet in the form of land set aside for residents. Land titling in Cambodia is continuing with reduced funding from the governments of germany, Canada and Finland.24

thE EuropEan union (eu): the eu is Cambodias biggest development partner in terms of grant aid, and in recent years it has funded a number of project focusing on land rights.25 also, one of the key strate-gies of the eu is to promote international trade with Cambodia, for example, through the everything but arms (eba) initiative which grants duty-free access to imports of all products, except arms and ammu-nitions, from some of the worlds least developed countries . The objectives of the eba trade pref-erences include the promotion of sustainable de-velopment and good governance in the developing countries. preferences can be temporarily withdrawn if there are serious and systematic violations of in-ternational conventions on human and labour rights, the environment or good governance. however, despite the ebas objectives, the initia-tive has also fuelled land grabbing in Cambodia be-cause, as this report demonstrates in the following case from Koh Kong, private companies can illegally obtain large swathes of community arable land (in contravention of the 2001 Land Law) and forcibly evict residents in order to profit from sugar exported to the eu. nearly 90,000 hectares have been doled out in concessions for sugar over the past two years primarily to firms connected to ruling party senator Ly yong phat to take advantage of the european market.LiCaDhO and babC are among the ngOs based in Cambodia that are very concerned that the european Commission has demonstrated little accountability

23 Investigation Panel Report, Cambodia LMAP Project, World Bank 201024 Land Titling in Cambodia: Lessons from the Land Management and Administration Project, Bugalski, Grimsditch and Pred, 20125 http://cdc.khmer.biz/projectlist/project_list_updated.asp?OtherDonor=6&status=0&UpdateFrom=1/1/2011&updateto=5/16/2011

16cambodia for sale

or willingness to abide by its safeguards in relation to the eba.

unitEd nations: un Committee on economic, social and Cultural rights (unCesCr) in Cambodia has a Land and Livelihoods programme, which aims to promote the implementation of the laws protecting peoples rights to land and housing, in cooperation with the govern-ment, local communities, civil society, businesses and international actors. it pays special attention to moni-toring and protecting the land and livelihood rights of the poorest and most vulnerable people, in both urban and rural areas, including indigenous populations.

danida: the Danish development agency DaniDa has, like other bilateral donors, supported develop-ment projects in Cambodia that have been negative-ly affected by the increasing land grabbing issues. sites of development programmes have been given to economic land concessions by the Cambodian gov-ernment. These include forestland that is protected by law. Danida has been supporting environmental and natural resource management in Cambodia since 1994. in 2007, Danida began supporting the develop-ment of a national Forest programme which aimed to promote conservation and sustainable manage-ment of forest resources in Cambodia.

Case studykoh kong sugar plantations26

introductionat least 459 families and over 5000 hectares of com-munity land in sre ambel and botumsakor Districts of Koh Kong province in Cambodias south-western corner have been affected by a sugar plantation pro-ducing sugar for export to the european union. in au-gust 2006, contracts were signed for two economic Land Concessions in the botumsakor and sre ambel

districts. The concessions were granted to Koh Kong plantation Co. Ltd and the Koh Kong sugar Co. Ltd. respectively. The two concessions are in fact a single plantation from which sugar is exported to the euro-pean union under the everything but arms initiative (eba). These concessions have involved widespread violations of national and international law and have

26 This section is mostly taken from Bittersweet: A Briefing Paper on Industrial Sugar Plantation, Trade and Human Rights in Cambodia, Bridges Across Borders Cambodia, 2010

MONDOL KIRI

PREAH VIHEAR

PHNOM PENH

SIHANOUKVILLE

KAMPONGCHNANG

KAMPONGSPUE

SVAYRIENGPREYVENG

KAMPONG CHAM

KAMPONG THOM

KRATIE

KANDAL

KAMPOT

KEB

TAKEO

ISLAS DE LA BAHIA

OTDAR MEAN CHEAY

BANTEAY MEAN CHEAY

SIEM REAP

PAILIN

BATAMBANG

POUTHISAT

KOH KONG

VIETNAM

LAOS

THAILAND

PHNUM PENH

ROTANAH KIRISTOENG TRENG

17cambodia for sale

increased food insecurity for the local farmers who owned and farmed the land.Villagers have tried lodging complaints with com-mune chiefs, district and provincial authorities, the national authority for Land Dispute resolution, and even the national assembly, but to no avail. ngOs have also tried to lobby the european Commission to live up to its human rights safeguards in relation to the everything but arms (eba) trade initiative, but the response has so far been negative.

impact on local communitiesThe immediate impacts of the sugar plantation on lo-cal communities were documented in the publication Losing ground27, by the Cambodian human rights ac-tion Committee (ChraC), as well as in media reports which describe how the lives of affected villagers in sre ambel District were disrupted on 19 May 2006 when bulldozers began clearing farmland in Chikhor Leu commune. The affected villagers, who lacked formal land titles but had possession rights under the 2001 Land Law, say they were unaware of their rights under the 2001 Land Law. armed guards have since denied the community access to the land claimed by sena-tor Ly yong phat and have shot cattle that strayed too close to the contested land. by usurping farms and killing cattle, the concession has increased rural pover-ty and decreased food security of some of Cambodias most impoverished rural communities. in september 2006, community members resisting eviction were assaulted by military police accompa-nying demolition crews, who also fired shots near the crowd. several protestors were wounded during the in-cident.28 when ngOs attempted to investigate, heavily armed police prevented them accessing the villages.29

The serious nature of human rights violations con-nected to these concessions was documented by the united nations Office of the high Commissioner for human rights in its 2007 report which confirmed that the concessions in sre ambel were granted

without public consultation and that: The clearing of rice fields and orchards belonging to villagers in sre ambel district has affected over 400 families; some have little or no land remaining for farming, and are surviving on last years rice harvest. The concession has also restricted the availability of grazing land for villagers livestock, and company security guards have reportedly seized or shot cattle straying into the concession area. Villagers are now reported to be facing difficulties in repaying loans taken out under micro-credit schemes, due to the loss of sources of income. both companies have expanded their activi-ties despite efforts to resolve the dispute, including the establishment of a provincial working group and an agreement that further bulldozing activity would be suspended until the dispute was resolved.Testimonies gathered from affected people reveal the following impacts from these concessions: Food insecurity has increased as farmers have

lost valuable farmland, grazing land and access to the forest. affected farmers can no longer grow enough food to sustain their families. Many have sold their cows because they have nowhere for them to graze.

Chemical waste from the plantation has poisoned local water sources and killed fish, which is the main source of protein for surrounding communities.

Children have been pulled out of school in order to work and raise money for their struggling families.

some people who lost all their land have had no choice but to work on the plantations. The pay is low and the work is irregular. before they can work for the company, people must also agree to drop any claims for compensation.

Many outspoken community members fear for their security because of their activism.

Many affected families report impoverishment as a result of the loss of their land and livelihoods, which is having an impact on their mental and physical health. a more recent report has provided

27 Quoted in Losing Ground, Forced Evictions and Intimidation in Cambodia, CHRAC, 2006 (http://www.chrac.org/eng/CHRAC%20Statement%20in%202009/Losing%20Ground%20FINAL.compressed.pdf)

28 Cambodian military police mobilised to protect concession of ruling part Senator, LICADHO, 02.08.2007 (www.licadho-cambodia.org/arti-cles/20010201%2000:00:00/51/index.html)

29 Farmers fear worst in dispute with CPP Senator, Cheang Sokha, Phnom Penh Post, March 2, 2007

18cambodia for sale

an update of the situation in sre ambel.30 people continue to protest by hanging banners outside their homes. One reads good leaders will make people wealthy, while those who are greedy will make people become needy. One protestor, ann inn, was hacked to death by an unknown assail-ant after he tried to take photographs of bulldoz-ers razing villagers land.

where is the sugar going?The sugar is being exported to europe under the eu-ropean unions everything but arms initiative, which grants tariff and quota free access to the european market and a guaranteed minimum price for sugar to Least Developed Countries (LDCs) including Cambo-dia. according to eu trade statistics europe imported 10,100 tonnes of sugar from Cambodia in 201031.The president and CeO of Khon Kaen sugar stated in an interview with the phnom penh post that the prior-ity was to produce sugar for export, not for the local market: we plan to produce raw sugar for export to the eu market under the eba quota first, after that we will consider producing white sugar to serve domestic demand in Cambodia.32

Violations of Law and human rightsThe Koh Kong plantation Co.Ltd. and the Koh Kong sugar Co. Ltd. concessions violate numerous provi-sions of Cambodian law: The land had been occupied by the villagers prior

to the 2001 Land Law under which they had pos-session rights and the right to continue to use the land until their claims had been assessed.

article 58 of the 2001 Land Law stipulates that economic land concessions can only be granted on lands that have already been registered as the private property of the state.33 The land at issue was neither registered as state private land when bulldozers began clearing the land on 19 May

dEtails of concEssions in srE ambEl and botomsakor district, koh kong provincE

koh kong plantation co. ltd. in srE ambEl district 9,400 hectares leased for 70 years for sugar cane production dirEctor Mr. Ly yong phat Council of Ministers approved the con-cession in principal on 20 March 2006 Com-pany signed a concession contract with MaFF on 2 august 2006.

koh kong sugar co. ltd. in botomsakor dis-trict 9,700 hectares leased for 70 years for sugar cane production dirEctor Mr. Chamroon Chinthammit (CeO of Kohn Kaen sugar) Coun-cil of Ministers approved the concession in prin-cipal on 20 March 2006 Company signed a con-cession contract with MaFF on 2 august 2006.

ownErship The two companies have sepa-rate concessions, which are both listed on the Ministry of agriculture, Forests and Fisheries (MaFF) website. although the two concessions are legally separate, in reality they are a single plantation controlled by three parties in a joint venture: Khon Kaen sugar (Thai company holding a

50% share);Vewong (Taiwanese partner, holding 30%);

andLy yong phat (holding 20%), one of Cambo-

dias most influential businessmen and a senator from the ruling Cambodian peoples party.

an examination of official documentation re-veals that the two companies owning the re-spective concessions both occupy the same office and applied for the concession, received approval, and signed the concession contracts on exactly the same days. This is clearly an at-tempt to circumvent the legal limit of 10,000 hectares per concessionaire for economic Land Concessions.

30 Still Losing Ground, Forced Evictions and Intimidation in Cambodia, The Cambodian Human Rights Action Committee (CHRAC), 201031 Eurostat/Comext 18/03/2011. Product Description: (1701) Cane or beet sugar and chemically pure sucrose, in solid form. UK imports value from

Cambodia in 2010: 10, 000 tonnes. Total EU 27 imports from Cambodia 10,100 tonnes32 Phnom Penh Post, Getting Cambodia Milling Again, 28 January, 201033 2001 Land Law, Art. 58; See also 2005 Sub-Decree on ELCSs, Art. 4.a (An economic land concession may be granted only on a land that meets

all of the following five criteria. The land has been registered and classified as state private land; 2005 Sub-Decree on State Land Man-agement, Art. 3 (State land can be granted for social land concessions, economic land concessions or other concessions if the land has been registered in the land registered as state public or state private land in accordance with the legal procedure.)

19cambodia for sale

2006, nor when the contract was signed on 2 au-gust 2006.34

article 59 of the 2001 Land Law prohibits conces-sions from being over 10,000 hectares and pro-hibits any one person or legal entity from being the beneficiary of multiple concessions if their aggregated total is greater than 10,000 hect-ares.35 it appears that the two concessions are in compliance with article 59. however, statements in the media make it clear that the two planta-tions are operating as a single concession. includ-ing the Koh Kong plantations, senator Ly yong phat has an interest in at least 63,000 hectares of concession land, a clear violation of the 2001 Land Law.

article 4c of the 2005 sub-Decree on economic Land Concessions requires environmental and so-cial impact assessments to be conducted prior to grant and operation.36 These assessments have not occurred.37

article 4d of the 2005 sub-Decree on economic Land Concessions prohibits any involuntary re-settlement for purposes of a concession and re-quires respect for access to private land.38 These concessions have led to the forcible clearing of the villagers farm land and armed guards cur-rently patrol the usurped villagers land. beyond the illegality of seizing farm and crop land from the affected community, the loss of agricultural area is having a dramatic impact on the food se-curity of many families; consequently, they may have no choice but to abandon their property in order to secure basic sustenance resulting in dramatically reduced economic and educational opportunities for their children. Thus, the con-cessions have encroached upon individual prop-erty and may lead to further displacement and destruction of the communitys livelihoods.

articles 4e and 35 of the 2005 sub-Decree on

economic Land Concessions require public con-sultations prior to the granting and operation of the concessions.39 This has not occurred.

The villagers demandsThe villagers primary goal is to re-establish their livelihood and a return to the peace and security they previously knew. Many of the families whose land was taken settled with the company for a few hundred dollars, but their land could be worth 10 times the level of compensation they received. The remaining families either want fair compensation so they can buy other land to replant and graze their livestock, or a total cessation of concession opera-tions with a return of all usurped land and fair and just compensation for damage to personal property including land and livestock. in 2007, the villagers and their lawyers filed com-plaints with the Koh Kong Municipal court for can-cellation of the concession and to demand fair com-pensation. however, between 2007 and 2010 the case was ignored and not proceeded according to law. since 2010 there has been some progress in the form of preparatory hearings, but justice remains a long way off.

responses from the euCambodian community networks and ngOs have launched the Cambodian Clean sugar Campaign which is calling on the european union to act on its commitment to upholding core human rights principles in its foreign and trade policy in Cambo-dia and to conduct a thorough investigation of the rights abuses associated with the Cambodian sug-ar industry. Moreover, the eu should require that the Cambodian government take measures to end these abuses and redress past abuses in accordance with european trade regulations. The everything but arms preferential trade scheme for Cambodian

34 Legal Officer, NGO Forum Land and Livelihoods Programme35 2001 Land Law, Art. 5936 2005 Sub-Decree on ELCSs, Art. 4.c.37 See also Law on Natural Resource Management, Arts. 6 & 738 2005 Sub-Decree on ELCSs, Art. 4.d.39 2005 Sub-Decree on ELCSs, Arts. 4.e & 35.

20cambodia for sale

sugar should be suspended if the industry does not clean up its act.40 On 7 January 2011 LiCaDhO, bridges across borders Cambodia, the Community peace-building network and Community Legal education Center (CLeC) sent an official letter to the european Commissioner for Trade regarding the everything but arms (eba) ini-tiative and serious and systematic human rights abuses in Cambodia. The ngOs called for an indepen-dent investigation into these human rights abuses, which they believe justify a temporary withdrawal of preferential arrangements from certain Cambo-dian products in accordance with article 15 of Council regulation (eC) 732/2008.The european Commissions Directorate-general for Trade replied to the letter on 9 February 2011. it explained that the issue had been addressed with the Cambodian government and that the eu had underlined the need for stronger action to protect the rights of the most vulnerable populations, espe-cially in these cases where the rights and livelihoods of many rural communities could have been nega-tively affected through the gravity of economic land concessions.41 The issue is being further discussed between the european Commission, the european external action services and eu Member states in the Council but needs to be addressed in a wider con-text of land evictions, rule of law and human rights abuses. The response from the european Commissions Directorate-general for Trade is reflecting that the european Commissioner for Trade does not want to initiate an independent investigation, or even inform the generalised preference Committee and request consultations, even though it is an obliga-tion under article 17 (1) of the generalised system of preference.42

The association of world Council of Churches related

Development Organisations in europe (aprODeV) followed up the Cambodian ngOs requests in July 2011. in a letter to the european Commissioner for Trade aprODeV urged the european Commission to comply with its obligation to inform the generalised preference Committee of the human rights viola-tions and to launch an investigation into the mat-ter within a month. The european Commissioner for Trade replied on 4 august 2011, recalling that the gsp scheme, and in particular everything but arms (eba), was created as an incentive based tool to sup-port development purposes.43 Moreover, he states that there is a consensus among Member states that the issue should be looked at from a broader govern-ment perspective: The situation should be tackled robustly but trade measures would certainly not be the first option.some members of the european parliament, espe-cially the subcommittee on human rights, have spoken out against land grabbing. Cecilia wikstrm, an eu parliamentarian from sweden, brought the de-bate to the fore recently when she met with affected communities in Kampong speu and Koh Kong prov-inces and called for a suspension of preferences for sugar on the grounds that these fuel land grabbing, forced evictions and other human rights abuses: i think we need, in the european parliament... to look into the details and the provisions put in place in the eba concerning human rights. in my view, they have been violated.44

Meetings between the eu and the Cambodian govern ment on the issue are ongoing, but so far they have not lead to any results for the 459 fami-lies in sre ambel and botumsakor Districts of Koh Kong province in Cambodia who have lost their livelihoods because of an illegally acquired sugar plantation producing sugar for export to the euro-pean union.

40 For the full set of recommendations, including those made to the Cambodian Government, see Bittersweet: A Briefing Paper on Industrial Sugar Production, Trade and Human Rights in Cambodia, Bridges Across Boarders Cambodia September 2010.

41 Letter from the European Commission Directorate-General for Trade to Bridges Across Boarders Cambodia, February 9, 201142 Article 17 (1) of the Generalised System of Preference states that where the Commission or a Member State receives information that may

justify temporary withdrawal and where the Commission or a Member State considers that there are sufficient grounds for an investigation, it shall inform the Generalized Preference Committee and request consultations. The consultations shall take place within one month.

43 Letter from Karel de Gaucht, the European Commissioner for Trade, to APRODEV, August 4, 201144 http://www.scandasia.com/viewNews.php?coun_code=kh&news_id=8858

21cambodia for sale

Conclusion The above case illustrates how measures designed to promote economic development (in this case, the eba) can, in a context of weak governance, have un-desirable effects. in this case the trade concession for sugar has made land grabbing for sugar planta-tions more profitable, while the regulations that should protect the land rights of the poor and limit the amount by which any single individual can profit from economic land concessions have apparently been circumvented.

The benefits of the sugar trade are clearly being captured by the wealthy elite keen to enter emerg-ing markets, generally to the detriment of the poor, and often illegally and with disregard for human rights. it is therefore the responsibility of the euro-pean Member states and the european Commission to address coherence of its trade policy with other policy measures (such as the eu Food security policy Framework) which aim to support and promote the resilience of smallholder farmers.

photos licadho

by malEnE haakansson

Chou sok shows his visitors what is left of his 7.5 hectare field. behind his familys wooden house he has four rows of sugar cane, a small fish pond and a couple of chilli bushes. On the other side of the hedge that surrounds his small plot he has a magnificent view of a huge sugar plantation. rows of green are spread out on a 20,000 hectare field covering two districts: sre ambel and botumsakor in Koh Kong province in Cambodias south-western corner. The owner of the sugar plantation is Cambodian senator Ly young pat, who, against Cambodias own laws, has required the big chunk of land which once fed 459 farmer families. Ly young pat exports the sugar to the eu through the eba agreement.

a long struggleit has been five years since the farmers lost their land. poverty has risen in the area because the farmers have no more or little land left to cultivate. 62-year-old Chou sok used to feed his nine-member family with rice, vegetables and products from his domestic animals. Today he struggles to have at least some food on the table. he lost all of his land and his main income comes from making baskets, which he sells at the market.On an outdoor bed two of his grand children are playing with a small animal they have found in the bushes. They are smiling despite an unknown future. before the sugar company came to bulldoze the land, Chou soks six grandchildren went to school, but now they can only afford to send one child.The affected farmers have organized themselves, and after 1 years of struggle with Ly young pats sugar company, the farmers were offered a small compensation. The company only wanted to pay for the loss of crops and not the value of the land, since the owner Ly young pat has made an agreement with the Cambodian authorities about the use of the land.

22

I hope I can get back my land

photos dan church aid

More than half of the farmers have declined the compensation and have decided to continue their struggle just like Chou sok.i still hope that i can get back my land. The compensation we are offered is too small, says the frail man who looks much older than his age.

Food insecurity risesThe farmers who agreed to take the compensation were not aware of the Cambodian land law, and if they were, they did not believe that they could win a case against the government, ex-plains Kong song, one of the village representatives.They regret that they accepted the compensation, but they were either threatened to agree or were promised to get a job at the sugar plantation, which very few got.Kong song earned about 671 euro a year by growing watermelons in his own fields. when work-ing at the Ly young pats sugar plantation he can earn 1.7 euro per day, but he will only have work 3-4 months a year, which equals between 142.8 and 190.4 euro per year.The farmers have become more vulnerable than they were before because they can no longer grow crops in their fields, which would at least secure them of having food for the most of the year. seasonal work cannot compensate for this increased insecurity, says Katja Levin, Country coordinator for DanChurchaid and Christian aid in Cambodia.

Violation of Cambodian lawaccording to Cambodias Land Law from 2001, the government is only allowed to expropriate land if it is in the publics interest and after a fair and just compensation has been paid. if the piece of land has been used by the same family for at least five years, the family has earned rights which can be translated into full ownership. Furthermore, to avoid land grabbing, the size of land concessions is limited to 10,000 hectares, and this prohibits an individual from control-ling an interest in a separate concessions over a surface greater than 10,000 hectares of land. but although all of these provisions have been violated, Ly young pat has been able to carry on his sugar venture because he is a senator and belongs to the inner circle of the ruling Cambodian peoples party.we are running court cases in the provincial courts, but the cases are stuck because the local authorities are afraid of Ly. This is why we have to lobby international organisations, donors and the shareholders of the sugar plantation in order to put pressure on the Cambodian government to follow its own laws, says Mathieu pellerin, Monitoring Consultant for the Cambodian human rights Organisation LiCaDhO. The president and founder of LiCaDhO worries about the consequences if the outside world does not hear the Cambodian peoples outcry:without land my people will die. Our government was supposed to bring democracy and devel-opment, but instead they have put Cambodia up for sale because they are greedy. This govern-ment does not fight poverty but increases poverty, says Kek pung, president of LiCaDhO.

23

24cambodia for sale

The development of fair and sustainable land distri-bution and land use policies and practices requires long term commitment and engagement by national and international stakeholders at all levels. For ngOs and others working in Cambodiathe following actions are central to ensuring that sustainable changes are achieved:

Consultation with, and support to, communities and poor people affected by land grabbing. in addition to material support (health, education, food and livelihood support) and legal assistance (including investigation and case representation) for displaced families, communities often need support to help them to understand their rights and represent themselves.

Mechanisms for coordinated advocacy and dia-

logue with the government for fair and transpar-ent implementation of legislation and policies relating to land and natural resources.

promoting engagement and response from inter-national donors and other relevant international actors for fair and transparent implementation of legislation and policies relating to land and natural resources. ngOs in Cambodia have high-lighted that land conflicts are often sensitive and beyond their capacities to address, and therefore also require a response from the international community.

assistance to overcome the barriers most people face in obtaining security of land tenure. Obtain-ing formal land titling can be a complex and costly process.

Knowledge sharing and strengthened coordina-tion among a broad spectrum of civil society or-ganisations working on land-related issues.

building the capacities of responsible local gov-ernment officials who frequently have only lim-ited understanding of the law and its correct im-plementation.

research and documentation to highlight the impacts of land insecurity and displacement on other sectors and issues such as agriculture, pov-erty reduction, disaster preparedness and resil-ience, and wide dissemination of these among government departments and donors. Data col-lection in relation to land deals, classification of land, and company records, is also needed to help overcome difficulties in finding accurate and up-to date data and information concerning who is involved in eLCs and land grabbing.

strengthening mechanisms for promoting ac-countable governance and monitoring of imple-mentation of development policies and laws re-lating to land and natural resources.

lEssons lEarnt

25the curse of biofuel in honduras

the curse of biofuel in honduras

Land grabbing in honduras is not a new phenom-enon. From the time honduras became an indepen-dent country at the end of the 19th century, eco-nomic investment and development has been highly linked to land and resource concentration. This has been the case with all major production sectors such as coffee, mining, timber and, not least, fruit. One of the largest landowners in honduras has been the north american company united Fruit Co. (uFCO). uFCO bought large areas of land and came to control almost the entire fruit production, the railroads and the shipping industry, as well as part of the political system. This situation continued through the 20th century, causing honduras to be known as the coun-try of origin for the term banana-republic.45

in spite of being a country enormously rich in nat-ural resources and in spite of having experienced a constant economic growth of between three percent and six percent during the last decade, honduras is experiencing very high levels of poverty especially among the rural population.46 part of these poverty issues are connected to the unequal distribution of land, where a few large (national and international) estates own more than half of the cultivated lands,

leaving many peasant families with little or no land to provide a livelihood.47

The issues of land grabbing in honduras today are characterised not so much by large stakeholders ac-quiring new land, but by the continued conflict be-tween large estates working to keep the land already

introduction

45 Honduras Centralamerika: http://www.honduras.centralamerika.dk/index.php?option=com_content&view= article&id=104:info-om-honduras&catid=50:om-landet-honduras&Itemid=7946 DanChurchAid, PT1 Programme, Civic and Political Space: Promoting Political Inclusion, 2011 2015, and Honduras: Human Rights violations

in Bajo Agun. International Fact Finding Mission Report; July 201147 The last agricultural census from 1993 estimated that only 3.7 percent of the producers own 53 percent of the cultivated area of the country.

The remaining 47 percent was owned by 96.3 percent of the producers with 71.8 percent of the properties being less than five hectares in size. This distribution has left more than 200,000 peasant families with no access or very limited access to land.

Honduras: Human Rights violations in Bajo Agun. International Fact Finding Mission Report; July 2011. La estructura agraria y el campesinado en el Salvador, Guatemala y Honduras 2001, (http://www.eclac.org/publicaciones/xml/7/9587/l492.pdf)

photo mikE kollffEl

26the curse of biofuel in honduras

grabbed and peasant communities and movements fighting to regain these lands. Two factors influence the development. The increased global interest in biofuels, carrying the promise of future economic ventures producing biofuels from african palm trees with the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM)48 boosting potential revenues from the palm-oil pro-duction plants. and on a national level: the 2009 Coup dtat that resulted in a general militarisation and a violent escalation of existing conflicts in hon-duras.The focus of this report is the area of bajo agun, where the conflicts over land are particularly intense, and involves the replacement of basic grains by a large scale monoculture of african palm plantations. To illustrate the issues at stake, this report focuses on the case of the estate owner Miguel Facuss, who is one of the most politically influential businessmen in honduras and one of the principal producers of af-

rican palms. Facuss is also renowned for being par-ticularly conflictive in his dealings with the peasants fighting for access to land.49 his company, the Di-nant Corporation, receives international monetary support for the development of plantations and has recently been approved by the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) in relation to a biogas facility con-nected to his african palm oil plants in bajo agun.50 as such, the case of Facuss and the Dinant Corpora-tion exemplifies the issues concerning international support to businesses involved in human rights vio-lations as well as conflicts related to land ownership and food security.The findings of this report are based on documen-tation from a wide range of different sources. but as many cases of e.g. human rights violation in the region have not been thoroughly investigated, ac-cess to information and documentation is an overall challenge.

48 The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) offers industrialised countries the opportunity to reach their own climate obligations through the funding of projects reducing CO2 in developing countries.

49 Trocaire: http://www.trocaire.org/resources/news/2010/11/25/5-killed-honduras-land-eviction50 CDM watch January 2011; and IFC; Corporation Dinant: summary of proposed investment 2009: http://www.ifc.org/ifcext/spiwebsite1.nsf/1ca07340e47a35cd85256efb00700cee/2F9B9D3AFCF1F894852576BA000E2CD051 Mestizo: Being of a mixed indigenous Maya and European descent52 Carbon, biodiversity and ecosystem services: exploring co-benefits; Honduras. UNEP WCMC, and Dansk Portal Honduras; landefakta www.honduras.centralmerika.dk53 Honduras: Human Rights violations in Bajo Agun. International Fact Finding Mission Report; July 2011

from bEing cEntral amEricas brEadbaskEt to importEr of foodhonduras is a subtropical country, stretching over 112,090 km2, with a population of 7.2 million inhab-itants. The majority of the population is mestizo51, with an estimated seven percent of indigenous groups and two percent of african descent. in 2005, honduras had nearly 50,000 km2 of varied forest cover, including tropical rainforests, cloud forests, mangroves, and coniferous forests, making it rich in biodiversity. however, it has also had one of the worlds highest deforestation rates, losing about three percent of its forest cover annually since 1990. in the lowlands towards the Caribbean lie some of Central americas most widespread banana planta-

tions, and in the south near el salvador coffee, to-bacco and corn are grown.52

honduras is a predominantly agricultural country where half of the population still lives in rural areas and is dependent on subsistence farming. The agrar-ian sector in honduras contributes approximately 27 percent of the countrys gDp and, according to the world bank and the Food and agricultural Organiza-tion of the united nations (FaO), more than a third of the country is considered arable. but many families have no access to land and thousands more own less than three hectares, whereas large concentrations of land are in the hands of a few private owners53.

27the curse of biofuel in honduras

The social gap between rich and poor is still among the most dramatic in the world.54

honduras has had a long history of conflicts over land due to the extreme inequality of land distri-bution as well as serious problems concerning land title registrations55. a 2006 study showed that 76 percent of the rural population lived in households which would not be able to provide adequate nu-tritional conditions for all the household members even if the entire income was devoted to feeding themselves.56 according to the world Food program (wFp) in a 2009 report on Latin america, honduras and guatemala each maintain one of the highest rates of child malnutrition in the region, with up to one out of every three children under five years of age suffering from chronic malnutrition.57

Food insecurity in honduras has been strongly ag-gravated during the last decade. The loss of crops due to climatic phenomena, the limited access to production assets, lack of access to land for the production of food and the effects of the global economic crisis, have all combined to increase food prices to such a degree that the purchase of basic grains has become practically inaccessible for many families. apart from adding fuel to the intensity of the struggles over land, the expansion of export crops such as african palm also results in the pro-gressive replacement of basic grains, thereby seri-ously affecting food security. honduras has gone from being one of the principal producers of basic grains in Central america to producing less than half of its own requirements, requiring it to import large quantities of basic foods like rice, corn and beans.

whereas large parts of the rural population are hav-ing difficulties feeding themselves, honduras is cur-rently producing more than 300,000 metric tonnes of african palm oil a year, of which almost 70 percent is exported.58

honduras is a state party to the international Cov-enant on economic, social and Cultural rights (iCe-sCr) and is as such obliged to respect, protect and guarantee the human right to Food. Treaties signed by the state of honduras are considered equal to other national legislations, and with the ratification of the iCesCr, honduras assumed the obligation to guarantee vulnerable groups, particularly peasant families and indigenous groups, sufficient access to the resources needed in order to feed themselves. according to the iCesCr, one of the main measures to implement the right to Food for landless peasant families is land reform. by being included in the hipC (initiative of highly indebted poor Countries), honduras is also obliged to develop a poverty reduction strategy (prs). in 2000, honduras signed The Millennium Declara-tion which includes a series of objectives, the most notable being the eradication of extreme poverty and hunger. The country thus committed itself to designing and implementing a prs in exchange for the relief of an essential part of its foreign debts. however, this prs did not include any specific plans for a handover of land to the poor and landless peas-ants, which is why the various peasants organisa-tions continue to demand a land reform process.59 at present there are an estimated 800 agrarian conflict cases filed with the national agrarian institute in honduras awaiting resolution.60

54 The Gini coefficient (an indicator which measures this gap) rates the distribution gap of family income for Honduras at 53.8. There are only 10 countries in the world with a coefficient higher than 55. In comparison, Denmark has a coefficient of 24

55 Only about 30 percent of the estimated 2.2 million land parcels in Honduras are registered in the property registry and many have overlapping claims: World Bank, Honduras Land administration Program, Background, 2009

56 Pursuing a dream: FIAN 2007(http://www.fian.org/resources/documents/others/pursuing-a-dream/pdf) Half the rural population (1.5 million people, or 300,000 families) were shown to live on less than US$ 0.50 income a day, and 25 percent to have income of less than US$ 0.25 a day.

57 WFP, 2009 (www.wfp.org/countires/honduras)58 Honduras: Human Rights violations in Bajo Agun. International Fact Finding Mission Report; July 2011. Palm oil is at present primarily used

for the production of vegetable oils for industrial use59 FIAN 2007 (http://www.fian.org/resources/documents/others/pursuing-a-dream/pdf ), Agrarian Reform and the Human Right to Food in

Honduras Report of the FIAN International and Via Campesina Fact Finding Mission July 29 - August 2, 2000 Hemisphere Initiatives: Deciphering Honduras, four views on post-Mitch political realities, Looking to ourselves: The response to Hurricane

Mitch in the Lower Agun Valley by Paul Jeffrey, 2001 60 Honduras: Human Rights violations in Bajo Agun. International Fact Finding Mission Report; July 2011

28the curse of biofuel in honduras

Failed Land reformsin the 1960s, the honduran government initiated a program distributing land to the many landless peasants through the agrarian Land reform Law. Over three decades a total of 409,000 hectares were handed over to 60,000 peasant families. The reform lands were distributed through the national agrarian institute (ina) and the land was to come from large landholdings, which either exceed an up-per limit of land ownership (so-called superfluous land) or are lying fallow. The agrarian Land reform Law also established that the agricultural produc-tion had to be mainly aimed at fulfilling the nutri-tional needs of the population.61

The agrarian Land reform Law contained various restrictions on the reform lands distributed by the ina; once distributed, the lands were earmarked as reform lands, and any re-sale needed to be en-dorsed by the ina, which would then buy the land back for re-distribution to other landless peasants. The law also required the peasants to establish themselves in cooperatives as a security measure against the risk of the properties once again being re-concentrated at the hands of large estates due to market-forces.in the 1990s, the political climate changed, and the introduction of the Law of Modernization and De-velopment of the agrarian sector (LMDsa) in 1992 effectively annulled the agrarian Land reform Law. The LMDsa was passed in consultation with the united states agency for international Develop-ment (usaiD) and the national Committee of pro-ducers for agricultural politics (COnppa), and was based upon the neoliberal concept of land being simply a commodity to be bought and sold with-out state intervention thereby largely restricting access to land to those who could purchase it. The

credit services, technical assistance, training and consultancy available to small peasant holdings were also privatised.62

Once the political support to the agrarian Land re-form Law was withdrawn, the distributed reform land quickly found its way back on to the hands of large estate owners. During the first years of the Law of Modernization and Development of the agrarian sector (LMDsa), more than 30,000 hect-ares were re-concentrated by the large estates and the trans-national enterprises. at the same time, new land transfers to peasant groups within the agrarian reform process almost disappeared. with the approval of the Ministry for agriculture and Livestock, many of the large producers once again extended their land beyond the maximum limita-tions of property established by the agrarian Land reform Law.63

several of the peasant cooperatives sold their lands to foreign corporations or local elites who were more than happy to pay under the table to corrupt peas-ant leaders. while some peasant cooperatives sold their land voluntarily or due to financial difficulties, there were also claims of forced sale and the forging of papers by large producers.64

as a consequence of the failing implementation of land reforms, several groups of landless peasants took matters into their own hands. They started to settle on lands which were either formerly desig-nated reform lands or which qualified for redistri-bution, according to the definitions set out by the agrarian Land reform Law.65 These settlements were contested by the large landowners, and many have resulted in conflicts ranging from tension and insecurity to violence, threats and assassinations. ina data from the year 2000 estimated that about 900 groups and peasant cooperatives had not been

61 FIAN: Agrarian Reform in Honduras: ARC fact sheet 2000 and, Pursuing a Dream, 2007 (http://www.fian.org/resources/documents/others/pursuing-a-dream/pdf )62 Honduras: Human Rights violations in Bajo Agun. International Fact Finding Mission Report; July 2011, The Inter-American Commission on

Human Rights, 2009. And FIAN: Agrarian Reform in Honduras: ARC fact sheet 2000.63 Honduras: Human Rights violations in Bajo Agun. International Fact Finding Mission Report; July 2011, and: Agrarian Reform and the Human

Right to Food in Honduras, Report of the FIAN International and Via Campesina Fact Finding Mission 2000.64 Hemisphere Initiatives: Deciphering Honduras, four views on post-Mitch political realities, Looking to ourselves: The response to Hurricane

Mitch in the Lower Agun Valley by Paul Jeffrey, 2001. Trucchi, Albasud: De nuevo corre la sangre en el Bajo Agun, 2010.65 According to Article 25 of the Agrarian Land Reform Law, land reform should take place on large land holdings which either exceed an upper

limit of land ownership or are lying fallow, (http://www.fian.org/resources/documents/others/agrarian-reform-in-honduras/pdf)

29t