Land Tenure in the Sudan:
An Overview
By
Mustafa Babiker
University of Khartoum
Introduction
In the1986 volume of the journal World
Development, British historian Anthony
Hopkins published an article questioning the
knowledge base that informed a 1981 World
Bank report titled “Accelerated Development in
Sub-Saharan Africa: An Agenda for Action”,
better known as the Berg Report
An phrase in that article, “A little knowledge
promotes easy generalisations; too much
paralyses the mind”, is nowhere is as valid as in
the case of the literature on land tenure in the
Sudan
Lacking thematic, geographic and historical
focus, the literature is either based on very little
knowledge and hence flawed with too many
empirically unfounded and history-distorting
generalisations or packed up with too many
contradictory accounts reflecting a
symptomatic confusion of the de jure (the legal
provisions in law) with the de facto (the practice
in the real world))
These problems raise grave doubts on the
potential role for the available knowledge in
influencing land tenure policy and legislation in
a manner that would ensure the equitable and
sustainable use of land and other resources
One such a defective generalisation is that
the British colonial government invariably
aspired to abolish communal land tenure
and to introduce instead individual absolute
ownership of the land, as happened in
England
As a matter of fact the institution of
individual private ownership of the land
along the Nile and its tributaries predated
by centuries the British conquest of the
Sudan
Moreover, in the vast rainland
areas, rather than the introduction
of private landownership, the
British struggled to maintain, if not
to impose, one form or another of
communal land tenure
This was especially the case in
areas that their potential as
suppliers of cheap export crops or
as seasonal wage labour reserves
were highly valued by the colonial
authorities
Thus, contrary to the wild generalisations
advanced by the “instant history” of the Sudan,
the staggering paradox is that it was the
colonial authorities—the primary agents of
capitalism—that advocated „communal‟ land
tenure, whereas members of the Sudanese
agrarian societies championed the cause of
„individual‟ private ownership of the land.
This “reversal” was dictated by the
requirements of one of the central guiding
principles of colonial administrative policy, i.e.
convenience and economy
Moreover, the sheer size of Sudan land
area (2.5 million km2) and the mechanical
low population density, invite the
propagation of the mistaken belief that
land is abundant and by implication the
issue of land tenure and rights should arise
However, statements about land
abundance are not only questionable, but
yet another reflection of the lack of
detailed geographic specific ecological and
land use knowledge
It is important to note that out of Sudan‟s
total area, 45.0% is desert; the floodplain
covers 12.0%, while hilly and gravel soil
occupy 9.0%
Only 34.0% is low rainfall savannah on
sand and clay soil and high rainfall
savannah on ironstone
This last category, together with the
floodplain, are the agriculturally high
potential areas in terms of arable land,
pastureland and forestland
Present Situation
Individual ownership of riverain lands
and communal landholding in the
rainlands have over the centuries
remained the main feature of the land
tenure system in the Sudan
At present, private landownership (about
2.5 million ha, or 1% of the total area of
the country) is largely confined to the
banks of the Nile and some of its
tributaries northern Sudan
Here security of tenure is ensured by the
provisions for the registration of titles in
all legislation since the colonial time
The bulk of land in the Sudan (248 million
ha or 99% of its total area) is owned by the
government
Communally held lands are legally owned
by the government subject to usufruct
rights vested in tribal or village
communities
This form of tenure is found in the sand-
dunes and clay plains running across the
centre of the country and in the whole of
southern Sudan
Given the sheer size of the communally held land
(95 % of all agricultural land in the Sudan,
including farmland, pastureland and forestland),
more than 80% of the Sudanese farming and
pastoral communities depend on it for their
livelihoods
However, there are no legal provisions in all
legislation for the registration of communal
usufruct rights
Thus, lack of security of tenure and the
associated official alienation of communal land
rights is perhaps the main reason behind the
natural resource based conflicts plaguing the
contemporary history of the Sudan
Official alienation of communally-held lands for
irrigated and rainfed farming, forest
reservation, and, more recently, oilfields
development, has been a common phenomenon
in Sudan for more than a century
The unplanned and unlawful expansion of
commercial production into tribal homelands
has resulted in reduction of land available to
traditional farmers and pastoralists
Often farmers have become tenants on these
commercial farms as a means of ensuring their
food security, or workers for daily wages
Moreover, commercial farming tends to take
over dry season pastureland and blocks
pastoral migration routes in the wet season
These factors constrain pastoral mobility and
exacerbate conflicts
In many parts of the country rainfed
mechanized schemes have been established
without the approval (or consent) of the
relevant authorities, or have been extended
beyond the boundaries demarcated for the
licensed scheme
Policy Guidelines
It is high time to address the causes of
conflict over land through a revision of
the policies, amendment of laws, and
innovation in institutions governing the
acquisition, development and
utilization of land, especially in the
rainlands
There is a clear need for legal reform to
allow for the registration of usufruct land
rights
Customary rights in the communal tribal
(unregistered) lands, where rights of
cultivation, pasture and woodcutting, etc.,
have been exercised for centuries should
be secured by law and government
appropriation of such rights without
compensation should be reconsidered
Of course there might be sound objections
against the registration of such land rights in
the name of individuals since the exercise may
prove to be costly and time consuming
However, there should be no objection to the
registration of usufruct rights in the name of the
collectivities holding the land (tribe, village, etc.)
Civil society organizations, local NGOs, etc., can
play a positive role in this regard by conducting
awareness campaigns on “land settlement and
deeds registration legislation” and to assist all
landholding collectivities to safeguard their
interests through settlements and registration
If any uncultivated (unoccupied) lands
are to be allocated for commercial
purposes, then the usufruct rights of
pastoralists and cultivators have to be
given due consideration (secured);
subject to payment of compensation in
cash or in kind (land)
It is expected that the National Land
Commission, to be established according
to the provisions of the 2005 Interim
Constitution, to deal with this issue
The disputes arising from the unplanned
expansion of rainfed mechanized agriculture
could be mitigated by the enforcement of the
conditions of the lease, especially the
observance of good husbandry practices
The present chaos in the allocation of land for
commercial farming could only be avoided
through institutional coordination the central,
regional and local levels
It is, again, the duty of the National Land
Commission to see that the conditions of land
lease agreements are not violated and that
institutional coordination is achieved