5. No special provision in Prepare resettlement plan: Major gap of substance 1. The LLE is silent on 2 and 3 the preferred LLE for a resettlement contents to include resettlement but there is option. plan or any special Involvement of and ensure nothing in the law to arrangements for APs their rights to suggest that a resettlement resettlement compensation relocation plan or action to assistance development implement a resettlement assistance in new location. plan would be illegal. Distinction drawn between 2. Provide for short and full plans, resettlement plan depending on numbers to administratively but be resettled. 3. Backed up by some regulations PART TWO: ACQUIRING 6. The Council of No specific procedures The spirit of OP 4.12 Spirit of OP 4.12 could be Involvement of owners Ministers conflicts with LLE‘s non- met present required by OP 4.12 but of involvement approves expropriation by more protective on the land to be content of resettlement of the owner apart from of land. Unlike the provisions and or practice acquired and greater plan implies APs will that provided for in article former law, is no on dealing with absentee protection for absentee be involved in all stages 5. it is not clear why that is provision for the acquisition. The silence owners should be confined to the of acquisition Municipality. Given many owner/user and or agent of LLE on the details of provided by a absentee owners, it may be to be present throughout acquisition may be taken framework developed unavoidable to allow all stages of acquisition. quite legitimately as as part of the RPF which absentee acquisition. It follows that providing a gap which could also serve as a acquisition may proceed can be filled by prototype for regulations whether the owner etc. is appropriate participatory made under article present or not. However arrangements. There is no 22(5) of the new law. under article 5 LLE ,a reason why the damage commission is to be provisions of article 18 formed the shouldn‘t equally apply to ―by Municipality‖ on which all acquisitions of land. the owner is represented to damage ―determine incurred due to land expropriation‖ which is differentiated from compensation. Damage is explained in article 18
5. No special provision in LLE for a resettlement plan or any special arrangements for resettlement Prepare resettlement plan: contents to include Involvement of and ensure APs their rights to compensation relocation assistance development assistance in new location. Distinction drawn between short and full plans, depending on numbers to be resettled. Major gap of substance 1. The LLE is silent on resettlement but there is nothing in the law to suggest that a resettlement plan or action to implement a resettlement plan would be illegal. 2. Provide for resettlement plan administratively but 3. Backed up by some regulations 2 and 3 the preferred option. PART TWO: ACQUIRING 6. The Council of Ministers approves expropriation of land. Unlike the former law, is no provision for the owner/user and or agent to be present throughout all stages of acquisition. It follows that acquisition may proceed whether the owner etc. is present or not. However under article 5 LLE ,a commission is to be formed ―by the Municipality‖ on which the owner is represented to ―determine damage incurred due to land expropriation‖ which is differentiated from compensation. Damage is explained in article 18 No specific procedures required by OP 4.12 but content of resettlement plan implies APs will be involved in all stages of acquisition The spirit of OP 4.12 conflicts with LLE‘s of involvement of the owner apart from that provided for in article 5. it is not clear why that is confined to the Municipality. Given many absentee owners, it may be unavoidable to allow absentee acquisition. Spirit of OP 4.12 could be met by more protective provisions and or practice on dealing with absentee acquisition. The silence of LLE on the details of acquisition may be taken quite legitimately as providing a gap which can be filled by appropriate participatory arrangements. There is no reason why the damage provisions of article 18 shouldn‘t equally apply to all acquisitions of land. Involvement of owners present on the land to be acquired and greater protection for absentee owners should be provided by a framework developed as part of the RPF which could also serve as a prototype for regulations made under article 22(5) of the new law. non-