By Princess Eugene Majuru
Princess of Harare, Mbari Royal Family
In 1891, the Lippert Concession was signed within the framework of imperial expansion in Southern Africa. It became one of several colonial instruments that shaped land ownership, sovereignty, and governance in what is now Zimbabwe.
More than a century later, an important legal question remains largely unexplored:
What, if anything, happened when the concession reached the end of its 100-year term in 1991?
The 1991 Reversion Argument
Some legal scholars and activists argue that if the Lippert Concession was framed as a 100-year agreement, its expiry in 1991 should have triggered a legal review of authority over land originally covered by it.
Was there:
-
A formal reversion of authority?
-
A parliamentary acknowledgment?
-
A judicial interpretation of the concession’s expiry?
To date, there has been little public discussion of this question in Zimbabwe’s legal system.
If no formal review occurred, it raises a legitimate academic and legal inquiry — not conspiracy, but constitutional interpretation.
Colonial Liability: A Legal Debate
Internationally, former colonial powers have faced increasing scrutiny regarding historical agreements and their long-term consequences. The argument of “colonial liability” is not emotional rhetoric; it is a developing field of international law. It examines whether acts carried out under imperial authority create continuing obligations. If the Lippert Concession was enforced under British imperial structures and later integrated into colonial constitutional arrangements — including the 1923 Constitution of Southern Rhodesia — then questions about responsibility cannot be dismissed outright. However, such claims must be tested carefully through legal scholarship, not political slogans.
Land and Historical Ownership
As Princess of Harare and a descendant of the Mbari royal lineage — the traditional custodians of the land upon which Zimbabwe’s capital now stands — I believe it is my duty to raise historical questions that affect my community.
Colonial policy disrupted traditional land governance systems. Certain constitutional clauses during colonial administration limited the recognition of traditional chiefs in urban centres such as Harare and Bulawayo.
The long-term impact of these policies remains visible today in patterns of displacement and cultural dislocation.
Whether these outcomes were legally justified at the time is a matter for historical and constitutional review.
The Currency Question
Zimbabwe’s currency challenges are often explained through economic policy, inflation cycles, and structural constraints. Those are real and documented factors.
However, some argue that unresolved questions of sovereignty, land mandate, and constitutional continuity may also influence broader perceptions of legitimacy in governance structures.
This does not mean colonial documents directly control monetary policy today. But it does mean that historical legitimacy debates can shape modern political confidence.
These are complex issues requiring economists, constitutional lawyers, and historians to work together.
The Role of the United Kingdom
The Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office has stated that issues relating to colonial-era agreements are domestic matters for Zimbabwe.
That is a standard diplomatic response. However, where agreements were created under imperial authority, it is reasonable to ask for clarity on historical interpretation and archival transparency. Engagement does not mean liability. But silence does not resolve history.
A Call for Unity and Legal Scholarship
Zimbabweans must approach this issue without tribal division. The Lippert Concession affected multiple communities. It should be examined as a national issue — not a regional one.
Zimbabwean:
-
Legal professionals
-
Historians
-
Constitutional scholars
-
Economists
should undertake a comprehensive academic review of the concession, its expiry, and its legal consequences. If there is no continuing legal relevance, that conclusion should be documented clearly.
If there is, then it should be addressed lawfully and transparently.
Duty, Not Division
As Princess of Harare, my role is not to inflame tensions but to raise questions of historical integrity and accountability for the benefit of the Mbari clan and all Zimbabweans affected by colonial land restructuring. The Lippert Concession affects all Zimbabweans so it is important to know and understand it.
The purpose is clarity.
History must be studied.
Law must be interpreted.
Nations must understand their foundations.
Whether the Lippert Concession carries present-day legal weight is a matter for courts and scholars — not assumptions. But ignoring the question altogether serves no one.
Comments
About Author
