The land dispute engulfing Malipati Ward 15 in Chiredzi South is not just a local disagreement — it is a stark illustration of how power, authority and opaque “development” projects are being weaponised to dispossess rural communities in Zimbabwe.
The community’s suffering exposes a deepening national crisis: the erosion of human dignity through forced land dispossession carried out under the cover of traditional authority and development rhetoric.
At the centre of the conflict is a contested push by Headman Manzini and Chief Sengwe to compel villagers to “donate” ancestral land to third-party entities, including Malipati Agrihub, Malipati Farmers Association Ltd, and organisations linked to SATWILD.
Villagers insist the land transfers were neither voluntary nor transparent.
“The headman and the chief want us to donate our ancestral land to third parties without proper consultation or fair compensation,” said Tazi Muchekelwa, one of the leading voices resisting the move.
“We do not care what they want to use the land for — but it must be done lawfully and fairly.”
For decades, Malipati families relied on this land for subsistence farming.
That changed when villagers say they were coerced into surrendering fields now fenced off and guarded by hired security personnel.
- Social commentary: Zim women face risks in giving life
- Need for transparency on The fears of the Hlengwe-Xangani ethnic group commonly referred to as the Chilonga community are not unfounded issue
- Social commentary: Zim women face risks in giving life
- Travelling & touring: A town where baobab trees rule the roost
Keep Reading
To date, more than 20 families have reportedly been displaced, with plans underway to move at least 15 more, according to community representatives.
What is unfolding in Malipati mirrors a broader national trend.
According to the Zimbabwe Human Rights Commission (ZHRC), forced evictions remain one of the most persistent human rights violations in rural Zimbabwe, particularly where commercial agriculture, conservation projects, and public-private partnerships intersect with communal land.
Between 2019 and 2024, the ZHRC recorded hundreds of complaints related to forced or coerced land displacement, many involving traditional leaders and private investors.
Section 74 of Zimbabwe’s constitution explicitly prohibits arbitrary eviction without a court order — yet communities continue to report removals executed through intimidation rather than due process.
Communal land, which supports over 60% of Zimbabwe’s rural population according to ZimStat, remains especially vulnerable due to weak tenure security and excessive discretionary power vested in traditional authorities.
Empowered through land-rights training by Community Tolerance Reconciliation and Development (Cotrad), villagers sought legal assistance from Matutu & Mureri Legal Practitioners.
In a letter dated May 1, 2025, the lawyers accused village leadership of coercion and highlighted how land-use agreements benefited a small group while excluding the wider community.
“Members of the community have expressed feelings of betrayal by agreements that allow land to be appropriated for agricultural purposes, with benefits limited to those who consented,” the letter reads.
On May 28, Muchekelwa was summoned to a hearing at Davata Community Hall, accused of sabotaging development projects. Despite strong community backing, traditional courts later ruled against him.
On August 5, 2025, the Community Court of Chief Sengwe fined Muchekelwa one herd of cattle, ordering him to cease opposing the land transfers.
“I do not know if it is now a crime to refuse to give away your land,” Muchekelwa said.
Civil society groups argue such rulings reflect how customary justice systems are increasingly used to silence dissent, rather than protect community rights.
SATWILD technical coordinator Chap Masterson rejected allegations of coercion, stating the project followed legal procedures and that land was voluntarily allocated by the community with regulatory approvals.
He further alleged that Muchekelwa’s opposition emerged only after his removal from a local leadership position and accused him of misinformation, threats, and legal misconduct — claims Muchekelwa strongly disputed.
Masterson also stated that a magistrate’s court ruled in favour of the project proponents, dismissing an interdict application by Muchekelwa and others.
However, villagers argue that legal victories do not erase the lived reality of displacement, intimidation, and loss of livelihoods.
The controversy has drawn the attention of the Zimbabwe Human Rights Commission, which confirmed it has opened a formal investigation.
“Yes, we are aware of the Malipati issue,” said ZHRC chairperson Jessie Majome.
“A formal investigation was initiated following concerns raised by Cotrad. Once the report is finalised, it will be made public.”
Human rights experts warn that when traditional leaders act as both arbiters and beneficiaries of land deals, accountability collapses.
Land evictions in Zimbabwe are rarely just about land. They are about who holds power, who benefits from development, and whose voices are expendable.
In Malipati, leadership meant to protect communal heritage stands accused of facilitating its destruction.
Until transparency, consent, and constitutional safeguards are enforced, communities like Malipati will continue to pay the price — not in policy documents, but in lost homes, broken livelihoods, and eroded dignity.
