Explained: Agricultural Reclamation and Private Property Infringement
The Agrarian Land Reclamation Law has not received sufficient attention, despite its potentially serious implications for housing, land, and property rights. The law issued in 2012, which is concerned with agricultural lands, can be considered equivalent in terms of risks to the urban planning laws issued during the same period as Decree 66 of 2012 or Law 10 of 2018.
The Agricultural Land Reclamation Law, issued in Legislative Decree No. 29 of 2012, defined agricultural reclamation as a series of agricultural actions designed to prepare a given piece of land and make it suitable for irrigated cultivation, with the goal of increasing the agricultural production of the land and making it more attractive for economic investment.
Agricultural land reclamation occurs following a decree by the Minister of Irrigation, made in consultation with the Minister of Agriculture, and after gathering the opinions of the General Farmers’ Union and the executive office of the governorate where the farmland in question is located. The Minister of Irrigation’s decision includes a statement that the agricultural reclamation will serve a public benefit. However, the law does not stipulate that the landowners themselves must agree with the reclamation decree, nor does it give them the right to object to it. The law also fails to specify the authority to which the landowners may raise potential objections.
After the Minister of Irrigation issues a reclamation decree, a reclamation sign is placed in the land record of the property in question. The party tasked with the reclamation process then takes possession of that property. Under the 2012 law, a technical committee is then formed that lists the facilities and crops included in the property, identifies the property’s occupants, estimates the compensation required for depriving them of their agricultural investment, and finally, compensates them for the destruction of the property’s components. The law sets a one-year deadline for compensation.
After the initial procedures are completed for the reclamation process, the property is listed in the land record as land reclaimed for irrigation.
Furthermore, the costs of the reclamation process are paid by the owners or the beneficiary, according to Article 14 of the 2012 law. Rights holders are prohibited from undergoing any transfer of ownership for such properties before paying the costs of the reclamation process which is determined by the Prime Minister’s decree. Instead, a compulsory insurance sign is placed on the property’s land record barring disposal of the property. The sign is not removed until after the payment is made.
Subsequently, a body called the Distribution Committee distributes reclaimed properties to the rights holders, taking into account that it should return lands to the rights holders when possible, otherwise handing over neighbouring and similar properties when not possible. In the event that the properties are unavailable for distribution, the party in charge of the reclamation process makes a compensation payment to the rights holder within a three-month deadline. The compensation amount is calculated according to the “real” price of the land.
In this sense, the reclamation process has become a form of expropriation, forcibly depriving farmland owners of their right to ownership in exchange for financial compensation. However, unlike in expropriations carried out under the Expropriation Law, here owners whose lands are subject to reclamation are not given the opportunity to object.
Under the Agricultural Land Reclamation Law, beneficiaries may receive a maximum of 16 hectares of their land after the completion of the reclamation process. Any land in excess of these 16 hectares is considered state property registered in the state’s name within the land record. This measure is yet another violation of ownership rights, through state expropriation of “excess” land.
When the Distribution Committee issues its decisions, it includes the names of the rights holders, the surface area and numbers of the properties in question, the surface area of the land deducted from each rights holder, and the owners whose lands have been deducted free of charge.
The committee announces its distribution decision in the main governorate headquarters, as well as at the district level and at the concerned General Farmers’ Union and local administrative unit offices. This announcement is considered a personal notification. The objections to the distribution decision may field to the committee itself, making it both an adversary and arbitrator at the same time.
Afterwards, the distribution decision is sent to the General Directorate of Cadastral Affairs to amend its records accordingly and register the changes in the Land Record under new real estate zones and numbers.
Decree No. 29 of 2012 restricted an owner’s right to dispose of their reclaimed agricultural land, while specifying no timeline for lifting these restrictions. In addition, rights holders may not make any changes to the reclaimed lands or the facilities they contain, at risk of legal penalties including imprisonment, fines, or paying compensation for damages.