IN his end-of-year statement, the Commissioner of Guyana Lands and Surveys Commission (GLSC), Mr Trevor Benn complained that defaulting lessees and squatters had hampered the progress of the GLSC. Lessees have not been paying their rents or have not gainfully been using the land and in many cases have been subletting the land in contravention of the Law. Squatters have been occupying State lands, even in Central Georgetown and in particular along the Soesdyke-Linden highway and even in the interior mining regions. In many cases, these squatters have “sold” the land to others and the victims only know of the fraud when they meet GLSC inspectors.

The illegalities committed on State lands have many and varied implications. An example of this, is the sand-mining along the Soesdyke-Linden highway, where both legal lessees and squatters have been mining far too close to the road and as a result, have been weakening the foundations of the road which has already become undulating and may someday suddenly collapse into sinkholes. The work of the GLSC is greatly challenged by the inadequate human and financial resources allocated to it.

Consumer advocates fully empathise with the plight of the GLSC and would recommend that very strong measures be taken against these squatters who are anti-national.
The difficulties which private landowners have to face from squatters are even more acute than those suffered by the State. The GLSC has the prestige of being a State Corporation and when confronting squatters, could call upon the help of the Police when necessary and in any case, State land is protected from prescriptive claims. It should be mentioned that when the State was protecting itself from prescription by squatters, there was an omittance to extend some protection to private landowners.

Until about the 1940s, squatting on both public and private land and claiming prescriptive titles thereto was a comparative rarity. This culture of squatting first made its appearance in the 1960s when most of the country became enveloped in racio-political disturbances, whereby there was a consolidated movement of various racial groups between villages. From then onwards, people began to imagine they were entitled to occupy any unoccupied land, irrespective to whom it belonged.

In the 1970s, when Sir Joseph Luckhoo was Chief Justice, the English legislation of making occupation for 12 years the basis for prescription was mechanistically adopted and this led to an upsurge of prescriptive claims on private land. In Guyana, before the 12-year rule was adopted, a squatter had to be in undisturbed possession of private land for 33 years and for state land for even longer before any prescriptive claim could be made in the Courts.

With the new 12-year rule, squatting became a profession from which to make money and had little to do with any need. Whole families would invade any unoccupied land, each member staking out his/her own claim. Close friends were also invited to participate in this illegal enterprise. When owners attempted to visit their land, they were often confronted with frightening threats of violence! Indeed, some of these squatters actually began to “sell” some of the land they had squatted upon. A great deal of this squatting occurred on East Coast Demerara, East Bank Demerara and parts of Berbice.

The 12-year rule, as pointed out above, was adopted from English legislation. The rule, however, turned out to be inappropriate to Guyana. Guyana was still an agricultural and rural society while England was highly urbanized. The 12-year rule, in addition to being inappropriate to a rural society, was even more so because of the heavy emigration which Guyana suffered where, in a comparatively short time, more than half of the population emigrated leaving their properties in the care of others.

Squatting, in the majority of cases is theft, and has nothing to do with need. Guyana has a surfeit of land for which the relevant State agencies are willing to grant leases at very reasonable rentals and are open to the entire population. Yet, the squatters would not even contemplate leasing State land because they are actuated by speculatory greed and would prefer to occupy State or private land. A good example of the manifestation of such greed occurred in 2016 when the new Coalition Government came into office. Within a few days of the new Government’s accession to office, hundreds of squatters invaded GUYSUCO’s land on the East Coast Demerara claiming that they had a right to do so, The Police took resolute action to eject them and returned matters to normal.

Squatting erodes Law and Order in any society and should never be countenanced. In the case of State Lands, Government needs to act firmly and quickly since squatting could hold up or diminish the value of developmental works as happened with the road reserves of Mandela Avenue or the squatters at the Cheddi Jagan airport. The message should always be underlined that it is impossible to prescribe on State Lands. The 33-year rule of

occupation before any prescriptive claim could be made on private land should be restored for the reasons given above. Until the 33-year rule is restored, the Police should always be prepared to intervene if summoned to a squatting situation since most squatters always threaten violence to owners.