Abstract:
This study examines whether or not the Zimbabwean agricultural land expropriation laws are
consistent with its international legal commitments and obligations enumerated in Article 6 of
the Zimbabwe-Netherlands BIT which were expounded in the Funnekotter case. It begins by
exploring the concept of expropriation, and the main features of the Zimbabwe's agricultural
land expropriation laws, and proceeds to discuss the conditions of expropriation enumerated
in Article 6 using the Funnekotter case as a compass, before examining whether or not the
Zimbabwe's agricultural land expropriation laws are compatible with article 6 conditions of
expropriation. The main conclusion reached is that despite the good intentions and public
interests pursued by these agricultural land expropriation laws, they are draconian, and
inconsistent with the due process, non-discrimination, and compensation conditions of
expropriation. Thus, Zimbabwe may have to re-think its agricultural land expropriation laws
in light of the Funnekotter case.
