01 Feb 2018

Members of Ntlo Ya Dikgosi continue to advocate for some changes and improvements in the Matimela Bill No. 29 of 2017 which was presented to them by Assistant Minister of Local Government and Rural Development Ms Botlogile Tshireletso for first reading on Monday.   Debating the Bill, Kgosi Colly Cock of Thamaga Region said it would be unrealistic for the council to immediately sell matimela after the recommended time of keeping without verifying whether the owner will show up or not.

He further noted that some farmers, most ofwhom are old people who have been left on their own by their children, may access information about their strayed cattle late and therefore should not be punished for that.

Kgosi Cock noted that as dikgosi and also farmers they should not make stringent laws which may impoverish them in the long run and therefore called on the House to be wary of any provision which may not augur well with pastoral farming community in future.

He also said the House should acknowledge the difficult terrain of the country as it is not the same, noting that some Matimela kraals are located in very farvaway places which may require a communal farmer to hitchhike amid limited funds in order to reach the destination. In this regard Kgosi Cock said the provisions of Section 12 (1) and (2) should be reviewed as they have the potential to negatively harm farmers. Section 12 (1) states that; The owner of an animal placed in a Matimela facility may, notwithstanding the provision of Section 9 (4)(c)  and (d), claim such animal in such manner and upon payment of such fees as may be prescribed.

(2) A person who fails to pay the fees specified under subsection (1) within 14 days of claiming an animal placed in a matimela facility, shall be deemed to have abandoned the animal and the animal shall be sold in accordance with the provisions of Section 13.

In the meantime, Kgosi Kgomotso Boiditswe of Serowe Region said where possible the council or Matimela Master should phone owners of cattle with ear tags instead of keeping the animals in the matimela facility. He said in that way the council will not incur unnecessary costs.

Still on the same Bill, dikgosi said there was no need to in the first instance engage Magistrate Grade II or above, for a declaration of the council’s or interested party’s rights in the matter, in the event of there being any dispute as to whether (a) any animal is or not matimela or (b) any person is or not the owner of any animal kept in a matimela facility.

They said case should start from customary court level and go up with the set litigation structures. Debate on the Bill continues. Ends