Dr Josh Doble is director of policy and advocacy at Community Land Scotland, which represents community landowners and supports reform of landownership in Scotland

For more than 30 years, thousands of Windhoek residents have been waiting for one thing: land ownership.

Lazarus Kwedhi and Sem Billy David For more than 30 years, thousands of Windhoek residents have been waiting for one thing: land ownership. Not a promise. Not a number on a map. Real, legal ownership that they can pass on, build on and use to create wealth. Instead, they have received “formalisation”, repeatedly presented as a campaign message. It appears every election cycle to cool the anger of voters in Havana, Goreangab, Otjomuise, Okuryangava, Okahandja Park, Babylon and Kilimanjaro. After the votes are counted, however, the process slows down and people are dumped back into the same cycle of waiting. Hence, this is not formalisation. This is political deception. How is the system designed to fail the masses? The City of Windhoek’s land delivery process follows a backward logic. First, people occupy municipal land and erect structures because no serviced land has been prepared for them. Second, the City undertakes mapping and structure registration. But because there is constant movement into and out of Windhoek, coupled with an inadequate supply of land released in advance, the only tool left is to label people illegal land grabbers, followed by evictions and demolitions. That does not solve the problem. It merely shifts vulnerable families around and creates a market for community leaders who are entrusted to give “permission” to build shacks. Many benefit financially or otherwise from the power that comes with controlling access to land. Third, an occupation certificate may be issued. There is no clear legal timeframe for this process. This stage alone can take up to 20 years, and it still does not provide ownership. Fourth comes the lease agreement. Here lies the biggest trap. The lessee is not allowed to build a permanent structure. There is no defined timeframe for rent-to-own. There is no stated land value and no option to purchase. Under this arrangement, the City of Windhoek remains the landlord, collecting revenue every month while denying residents the very purpose of formalisation: land ownership. The result is a generation of tenancy. Grandparents, parents, children and grandchildren are all born and raised in shacks on the same piece of municipal land. And because there is no security of tenure, residents can potentially be evicted if the City identifies a “potential buyer”. It is not about affordability. It is about exclusion Let us be clear: people are not living in shacks because they want to. The problem is not necessarily that a teacher, nurse, police officer or soldier cannot afford a house. Many may qualify for government housing subsidies. The problem is that the City’s land delivery system is not designed to convert those subsidies into plots and secure tenure. So today, we have soldiers protecting the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Namibia while living in shacks without toilets. They relieve themselves in buckets and plastics, just like many other residents in informal settlements. What exactly are they protecting? And what legitimacy does a state have when it cannot adequately house the people it pays to protect it? A constitutional violation Land is a finite national asset. The Constitution recognises the right to acquire and own property. When the City prolongs ownership indefinitely through endless leases, it denies citizens the opportunity to build wealth. Land is not simply a place on which to build a house. It is an economic power. It is collateral for a bank loan. It is inheritance. It is dignity. By keeping the majority as perpetual tenants, the government is effectively excluding them from meaningful participation in the economy. What must change If the government is serious about formalisation, it must stop selling false hope. Three things must happen now. 1. A time-bound path to ownership Every lease issued by the City should include a clear rent-to-own timeframe and a purchase price, with conversion to freehold or starter title under the Flexible Land Tenure Act. 2. Link housing subsidies to serviced land The government must create a serviced land bank and allocate plots to public servants and other subsidy beneficiaries. No housing subsidy should be issued without a realistic pathway to securing land on which to build. 3. Stop campaign-driven delivery Formalisation must be removed from election politics and treated as a continuous, budgeted 10-year infrastructure programme, rather than a once-off announcement made during election cycles. Windhoek residents are not asking for handouts. They are asking for what they believe the Constitution promises: the right to own land. Until the City of Windhoek converts formalisation into actual land ownership, it will remain what it is today: a smokescreen to secure political seats, rather than a policy to secure people’s future. The people have waited for more than 30 years. They cannot wait another generation.

Arguments over development plans and landownership have created a spiraling dispute, dividing the monks of St. Catherine’s and pitching them against the governments of Greece and Egypt

Arguments over development plans and landownership have created a spiraling dispute, dividing the monks of St. Catherine’s and pitching them against the governments of Greece and Egypt

Arguments over development plans and landownership have created a spiraling dispute, dividing the monks of St. Catherine’s and pitching them against the governments of Greece and Egypt

Arguments over development plans and landownership have created a spiraling dispute, dividing the monks of St. Catherine’s and pitching them against the governments of Greece and Egypt

Arguments over development plans and landownership have created a spiraling dispute, dividing the monks of St. Catherine’s and pitching them against the governments of Greece and Egypt

Arguments over development plans and landownership have created a spiraling dispute, dividing the monks of St. Catherine’s and pitching them against the governments of Greece and Egypt

Arguments over development plans and landownership have created a spiraling dispute, dividing the monks of St. Catherine’s and pitching them against the governments of Greece and Egypt