Where are the position papers on land?

The second national land conference looms large and is now just over four months away. The organisation of this crucial meeting, which was initially supposed to take place in 2016, is now in the hands of the Office of the Prime Minister, after the land reform ministry conducted a series of consultations countrywide last year. Government pushed the conference to 2018, after stakeholders such as the Namibia Non-Governmental Organisations Forum (Nangof) claimed the land reform ministry was not ready to host a meeting of such a magnitude last year, saying there is too much at stake and the conference is being organised without the involvement of all the roleplayers. Most NGOs have now gone quiet, while government, through both the Office of the Prime Minister and land reform ministry, has failed to adopt a proactive stance in the build-up to the conference. A proper communication model, which would have ensured maximum effectiveness, has not been developed as yet. And as pointed out last year this time, there appears to be no urgency in dealing with the issue of land reform - judging from the conduct of the authorities. All the information related to this important event is seemingly kept under wraps, with no clear details of what is happening on the ground being shared with important stakeholders, including the media. It also goes without saying that most of the political parties represented in the National Assembly are yet to come up with position papers on the issue of land reform. Interestingly, the ruling party, which is supposed to lead debate on this topic, has become too comfortable, which is a far cry from its radical stance of yesteryear. Instead, the Landless People's Movement and the Affirmative Repositioning movement continue to make the right noises about land and have outshone mainstream political parties, who are failing to take the lead on this crucial discussion. It has taken us 27-odd years to take stock of what was discussed in 1991, when land reform was pushed forward with understandable intensity. However, this intensity is nowhere to be found this time around, even though we are dealing with a sensitive subject that has affected our heritage and human rights as a nation. What a shame!