Squatting must be extirpated

Oct 18, 2020 Consumer Concerns, News

---

CONSUMER CONCERNS

By Pat Dial

Squatting is one of the worst social ills which has afflicted Guyana since Independence. Squatting, until the 1950’s, was a comparatively rare occurrence and wholesale squatting of many scores of squatters descending on private and public property was unknown. Squatting of the type which recently occurred when hundreds of squatters invaded GuySuCo’s lands on the East Coast Demerara first had its parallel during the racial disturbances of the 1960’s.
During these disturbances, Indians who lived in predominantly African villages relocated to the nearest Indian villages and the same occurred in respect of the Africans. These “refugees” settled on the outskirts of the villages and were convinced that the time will come when they could return to their homes; but such a time never came. Instead, during President Burnham’s long rule, people became obsessed with emigrating abroad and tens of thousands emigrated to the neighbouring countries and North America. These emigrants left their property in the care of any relative or friend who would undertake the responsibility. But soon these attorneys themselves emigrated leaving others who would barely supervise the property. Squatters moved in and in due course claimed prescriptive rights.
Squatters are actuated by greed and by the belief and desire that they could steal someone else’s property with impunity. Indeed, some of them actually convinced themselves that they had a legal and moral right to squat. Almost all squatters would have a hard luck story to tell about how poor they were, or the six children they have, or their starvation wages and so on. But if one asks them whence they came, it seems to touch their Achilles heel and they become very aggressive. Their sensitivity is aroused because it would have become clear that they were intent on getting someone else’s property for nothing.
This pattern of occupying State lands after an Election first occurred when APNU+AFC came into office five years ago. The new government had not even settled down before hundreds of squatters invaded state lands on the East Coast Demerara, falsely claiming that the new Government had promised them this land. They were successfully expelled by the Police after a vigorous show of force. The same pattern repeated itself when the PPP/C assumed office but the number of squatters was far more.
These squatters invaded East Coast sugar estate lands belonging to GuySuCo, especially in the Vryheid Lust, Chateau Margot and Success areas, and even aggressively attacked NICIL and GuySuCo officials. The Police were compelled to use tear gas and rubber bullets. When the media interviewed the squatters, they all aggressively declared that they will not remove irrespective of the damage they have caused GuySuCo and the sugar industry.
They have destroyed sugarcane breeding nurseries and invaluable scientific research and it is estimated that GuySuCo would have sustained a loss of $2 billion. Such a loss is a great setback for the sugar industry which is now being resuscitated and had expected to provide employment for several thousands of workers within the next four years. Do the squatters care about the sufferings they would have imposed on the hundreds they have denied employment?
This squatting problem could be brought under control or returned to its pre-1950 condition or may even be eliminated if the following are done:-
(1) The State must vigorously enforce the Laws against squatting and trespassing on private and public property. Despite this squatting on public and GuySuCo’s land, no squatter has been brought before the Courts. Indeed, the Authorities have been discussing giving the squatters land elsewhere or even “regularizing” them. The squatters are being rewarded for their wrong doing. Except the State prosecutes squatters and expel trespassers, the problem will never be controlled.
(2) Squatting should be made a criminal offence.
(3) The present 12-year prescriptive rule was adopted from English Legislation and is inappropriate for Guyanese conditions. England is a highly urbanized country while Guyana is still rural and Guyana has one of the highest emigration rates in the world. People leave their properties in the care and custody of any relative or friend who would be willing to assume the responsibility and usually pay the taxes and costs of cleaning. Very often, these attorneys themselves emigrate and squatters move in. When the owners return, they find someone else owning their property. The 33-year rule should be resuscitated. The State has protected itself by making it impossible to prescribe on State land but it did not extend such protection to private property. This omission must be corrected and the 33-year rule for prescription on private property should be revived. This would greatly diminish squatting.
(4) Wider knowledge of squatting and its implications need to be disseminated. This could be done via the print and electronic media, at the teachers’ training institutions and in the primary schools.

(The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of this newspaper.)

---

---