A/HRC/24/41/Add.1 worked as labourers, on the private farms established on those taken lands, creating a dependency on white landowners for generations of San and hindering the development of their own viable economies. Following the decline in commercial agricultural activities in the country, thousands of San people lost employment as farm labourers and today have no land base at all, living as squatters at the edges of the former or current private farms or in other precarious land tenure situations. 32. In accordance with section 2 of the Agricultural (Commercial) Land Reform Act (Act No. 6 of 1995), the Government may purchase lands to redistribute to landless groups who wish to be resettled, especially those that have been “socially, economically and educationally disadvantaged by past discriminatory laws or practices”. The National Resettlement Policy of 2001 further elaborates that the resettlement “will focus on the resettlement of eligible persons in ways which are institutionally, sociologically, economically and environmentally sustainable and which will allow the beneficiaries to become self-supporting”.8 The National Resettlement Policy identifies the San as one of the main target groups, noting that they “have endured exploitation and discrimination at the hands of their fellow citizens throughout history”.9 33. Although expropriation of lands for land reform is authorized under the Agricultural (Commercial) Land Reform Act, for political and other reasons the Government has mainly been purchasing lands under the principle of “willing buyer, willing seller”. In accordance with this principle, the Government has the first option to buy any private farm that is up for sale at market value. All purchased land becomes State land, with the resettled groups having the right to a 99-year lease. However, it is not clear what happens once this lease term expires, thus the underlying issue of land ownership remains unresolved. In any case, the Special Rapporteur was informed that, as of yet, no leases – either communal or individual – have been given to resettled San groups. 34. To date, seven resettlement farms measuring some 6,000 hectares each have been purchased for San people, with the assistance of the Division of San Development. While achieving the important goal of providing some San groups with land, the resettlement process has been slow and plagued with problems. The Ministry of Lands and Resettlement, which is responsible for purchasing lands, has been hamstrung by inadequate funding and, according to the Government, there is also an overall shortage of landowners who are willing to sell as well as a shortage of good quality lands to buy. 35. In this connection, the Special Rapporteur was informed that a long-awaited deal to purchase a resettlement farm for members of the Oshivelo San community, which was originally evicted from Etosha National Park in the 1950s, did not advance because the seller ultimately withdrew the offer. Members of this community continue to await land, living on a small and crowded plot of land behind the police station in the town of Oshivelo, where the community has been squatting for some 20 years. Members of the Oshivelo community expressed to the Special Rapporteur their desire to have access to lands in the national park for tourism purposes as well as be provided with lands suitable for agricultural activities adjacent to the park. 36. Even when lands are available and purchased, these are not always sufficient or adequately situated for productive agricultural use or other economic purposes, even though under the National Resettlement Policy “land with sufficient resources” is the “most important and decisive factor in Resettlement”.10 Further, there have been minimal in-depth land-use planning studies carried out prior to the selection of lands or to the resettlement of 8 9 10 10 National Resettlement Policy, p. 1. Ibid., p. 3. Ibid., p. 6.