The Dark Side of Development

These are really Evil Politics.

This is what happened in Connecticutt. Some government bureaucrats imposed the "eniment doman" principle to forcibly remove people from their houses and offering inadequate compensation. The civil authorities then turned around and sold the land to a private developer.

The people who got displaced sued the local government. The case ended up in the Supreme Court, which ruled 5-4 against the displaced people.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/ar...

Amazingly, it was the so-called "liberal" justices (Anthony M. Kennedy -- a "swing" justice -- and David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer) who along with Justice John Paul Stevens (who wrote the majority opinion) who sided with the commercial developers. The dissenters were Sandra Day O'Conner, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, and William Renquist.

Right now, the land sits there, dusty and deserted. No one will touch it.

bhaack, on this issue (unlike some others), I am completely on your side. What happened both in Cambodia and in New London Connecticut was government tyranny.

I believe that the author of the article is on our side as well. He stated:

"I say this last word tongue in cheek (if you hadn't guessed), for this is all about development not about God. The ones who lost the most were denied access to any benefit of this development, yet the finished product will be hailed as progess, a sign that Cambodia is on its way up."

What is very interesting, to say the least, is that (in the U.S. case) most liberals were on the side of government tyranny. And thus this is one of many reasons why I'm a libertarian and a registered independent. Many of us libertarians are "political orphans," who don't want any sort of government authoritarianism, whether from the so-called "left" or from the so-called "right."

I too live in Cambodia, first came here 15 years ago when things were very different, have been back many times and have lived here for 3 years now. Many of Cambodia's problems are not so simplistic as is given the impression by the article .

While all of us hate to see poor people or anyone for that matter lose their homes and be displaced and I appreciate the compassionate stance and reasoned article above, a little perspective is in order:

Without exception in most cases of displacement by the Cambodian authorities of people living in these small communties not a single one has title to the land. They are basically poor squatters. They built their meager homes out of what they could gather, scrounge or buy. They came to Phnom Penh from the country to try to earn a better living for themselves and took up residence where they could. Some have been in place for many years.

Just as here in Sihanoukville where I live, these people are fully aware they do not own the land and that the government may force them to leave at any time. They hope and pray that they will be offered compensation. But they do know what a precarious position they occupy.

Keep in mind the compensation they have been offered is for their homes...not the land they are on...those home have almost no market value in PP except to the owner who built them. As for the idea of Fair market value, the real landowner has allowed them to live, rent free or for very little, for years.

About the amount of compensation, most of the small shacks that these people called homes were built for less than $200. They were first offered over $8000. Some got much more. This is a huge amount of money to the average Cambodian and I can guarantee that in many cases it will be spent on new cell phones and motorcycles and NOT on a new home.

Also the Cambodian Government does have to do a better job of applying the rule of law in removing squatters. Compensation has to be fair and alternative housing needs to be found that is close to the city and vital services. This is one of the big issues in these people agreeing to go. They were offered alternative plots of land but they were way out of the city.

What may not be well known to those not dealing in land issues is that Cambodia has Land Laws and the courts adjudicate disputes all the time. Cambodians who truly own the land they are on know how to delineate that land and protect it. They also have some form of title, either provisional or secure. During the Khmer rouge years almost all land title records were destroyed and the government has struggled with this issue. However there is a system in place for even the poor to claim ancestral title to land. I don't claim it always works but it is a start.

This is really not an eminent domain case this is a case of the land owner wanting his property back to do what he has the right to do even in Cambodia; develop it. Now whether I agree with what that particular development is or not, I can say this from my personal experience of over 15 years: When I first came here virtually all Cambodians were extremely poor, and many remain so today, but with all the development that has come in the past years I have witnessed the growth of a stronger and stronger merchant middle class, the lessening of some of the worst poverty and people having a chance for employment as that development creates so many jobs. It is precisely those jobs and that development that brought those poor squatter to PP in the first place.

bhaack, on this issue (unlike some others), I am completely on your side. What happened both in Cambodia and in New London Connecticut was government tyranny.

I believe that the author of the article is on our side as well. He stated:

"I say this last word tongue in cheek (if you hadn't guessed), for this is all about development not about God. The ones who lost the most were denied access to any benefit of this development, yet the finished product will be hailed as progess, a sign that Cambodia is on its way up."

What is very interesting, to say the least, is that (in the U.S. case) most liberals were on the side of government tyranny. And thus this is one of many reasons why I'm a libertarian and a registered independent. Many of us libertarians are "political orphans," who don't want any sort of government authoritarianism, whether from the so-called "left" or from the so-called "right."

I too live in Cambodia, first came here 15 years ago when things were very different, have been back many times and have lived here for 3 years now. Many of Cambodia's problems are not so simplistic as is given the impression by the article .

While all of us hate to see poor people or anyone for that matter lose their homes and be displaced and I appreciate the compassionate stance and reasoned article above, a little perspective is in order:

Without exception in most cases of displacement by the Cambodian authorities of people living in these small communties not a single one has title to the land. They are basically poor squatters. They built their meager homes out of what they could gather, scrounge or buy. They came to Phnom Penh from the country to try to earn a better living for themselves and took up residence where they could. Some have been in place for many years.

Just as here in Sihanoukville where I live, these people are fully aware they do not own the land and that the government may force them to leave at any time. They hope and pray that they will be offered compensation. But they do know what a precarious position they occupy.

Keep in mind the compensation they have been offered is for their homes...not the land they are on...those home have almost no market value in PP except to the owner who built them. As for the idea of Fair market value, the real landowner has allowed them to live, rent free or for very little, for years.

About the amount of compensation, most of the small shacks that these people called homes were built for less than $200. They were first offered over $8000. Some got much more. This is a huge amount of money to the average Cambodian and I can guarantee that in many cases it will be spent on new cell phones and motorcycles and NOT on a new home.

Also the Cambodian Government does have to do a better job of applying the rule of law in removing squatters. Compensation has to be fair and alternative housing needs to be found that is close to the city and vital services. This is one of the big issues in these people agreeing to go. They were offered alternative plots of land but they were way out of the city.

What may not be well known to those not dealing in land issues is that Cambodia has Land Laws and the courts adjudicate disputes all the time. Cambodians who truly own the land they are on know how to delineate that land and protect it. They also have some form of title, either provisional or secure. During the Khmer rouge years almost all land title records were destroyed and the government has struggled with this issue. However there is a system in place for even the poor to claim ancestral title to land. I don't claim it always works but it is a start.

This is really not an eminent domain case this is a case of the land owner wanting his property back to do what he has the right to do even in Cambodia; develop it. Now whether I agree with what that particular development is or not, I can say this from my personal experience of over 15 years: When I first came here virtually all Cambodians were extremely poor, and many remain so today, but with all the development that has come in the past years I have witnessed the growth of a stronger and stronger merchant middle class, the lessening of some of the worst poverty and people having a chance for employment as that development creates so many jobs. It is precisely those jobs and that development that brought those poor squatter to PP in the first place.

Dear APerry,

thanks for your response to my blog post here. However, I think we differ on what is 'perspective'. Yes, Cambodia does have a legal system in place, but it is widely known that law counts for little, rather position, power and money.

As for land title, you are incorrect in saying the community did not have land title papers. Most, if not all residents of Group 78 have sufficient legal documentation to make a solid case in court. In fact, the Municipality of Phnom Penh recognised their legal claim to the land and this is the reason why they received any compensation at all. What is disturbing is that this community has very clear status, and they were waiting on a judgement on the legality of the Municipality's eviction order. The eviction went ahead despite that legal process not yet complete.

As for other communities in Cambodia, there are very few squatters as we might think of them in a Western sense. Since the Khmer Rouge legal land titles were all destroyed. There is NO land title documentation before 1979 and private land did not exist until the 1990s. As such we could call all Cambodians squatters. In recognition of this situation, the World Bank has been surveying the country and issuing land titles in many provinces. Where this process has fallen short of it's goal of providing legal security for land owners the WB has refused to touch any land claim that is embroiled in any kind of conflict, whether it is between neighbours or a community and the State of Cambodia. As such, the most vulnerable - the ones most in need of legal security - have missed out.

Yes, Cambodia is developing a growing middle and merchant class, that is excellent. However, communities who live on land that is desireable for reasons of development and commercial are vulnerable to intimidation, threats, legal summons, incarceration, and a number of serious injuries and death. Also, Group 78 existed in Phnom Penh long before the emergence of such business opportunities, so too Dey Krahom, Rek Reay, Boueng Kak and many other communities. This situation is far from limited to the city. Far more communities are at risk of forced eviction and illegal grabbing of land and natural resources in rural areas.

I don't pretend to be neutral on this issue. I purposefully stand on the side of the marginalised. I do, however, wish to see a positive engagement of the government, not simply a blind-folded critique. The Royal Government of Cambodia holds one of the keys to peace in Cambodia, and political realities often prevent authorities from acting in accordance with the law. However, abuse of power and position is all too prevalent.

Finally, a growing number of development partners, including the World Bank, Asian Development Bank, UN, US, EU and others, as I stated in my blog, recognise that development hurts the poor. This is not my perspective only.

Much peace to you.

PHOTO SOURCE:
Rob Carmichael, Robert@flarebrands.com

My apologies for the source not being included in the original post.

These are really Evil Politics.

bhaack you're so right! Yet it IS called development and the so-called development masters - the World Bank and Asian Development Bank recognise that such tyranny must occur for a country or region to 'develop'.

Of course, what is meant by 'development'? It is meant the attainment of a physical quality of life - cars, homes, education, health care, etc. What you and I might mean by development - access to such things by ALL is not necessarily understood by the elite in 'developing' countries or our own political leaders.

Development is also about a quality of relationship that includes reconciliation of past abuses. This process is effectively limited to five individuals in Cambodia - the remaining high-ranking Khmer Rouge leaders - but the reconciliation between the average Cambodian community is all but forgotten. A few excellent individuals and organisations continue this work, but it is so very low profile.

The reason why I call it development, and not Government tyranny, is because that is the framework for which it occurs in. Those lofty Bretton-Woods institutions that bring development to Cambodia are struggling to confront the tyranny that is contained within the development process, including corruption, lack of rule of law, and conflict of interest.

But kudos to the WB and others for calling for an end to forced evictions until transparent processes are implemented in Cambodia.

Hey, love the blog - i will try and keep up with it!! please keep more coming.