…as key legislation is passedWhat initially was thought would have been a simple amendment to the Laws regarding the titling of land ended with a heated debate in the House.The Bill namely the Title to Land (Prescription and Limitation) (Amendment) Bill was piloted by Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs Charles Ramson and was passed without the support of any of the Opposition Parties in the House.Ramson in his presentation to the House – when he asked the Bill to be read for a second time -said that the proposed legislation is designed to meet some of the lawlessness that has been having a creeping effect in society, “this kind of land grabbing is not to be overlooked.”The Legal Affairs Minister said that he was making reference to the fact that currently a person can squat on government land,Blank Jersey, and after 30 years can apply for prescriptive rights.When enacted persons will no longer be able to apply for prescriptive titling, regardless of how long they have occupied the land but the government would still be able to do the same on citizens’ property.The current legislation allows for a citizen to occupy another private citizen’s property for 12 years uninterrupted at which point that person can apply for prescriptive title“We are bringing very definitive legislation to ensure that there is no land grabbing and define which is state land and resources.”In the proposed legislation the immovable resource is listed as, “State land, government land, land wholly owned by State entities including companies and corporations or in which the controlling interest is vested in the State and any land identified by law or on a plan drawn and approved in accordance with any law for reserves for the public interest and benefit or to any undivided or other interest in any land in this subsection is expressly excluded and shall not be acquired by prescription through adverse possession.”Ramson stressed that there was nothing sinister or intricate about the Bill adding that the administration, “just wants propriety with respect to lands owned by the state.”He spoke of persons being complicit in seeing the grabbing of state land, suggesting collusion also at the level of NDC and RDC officials.Ramson pointed out that with the passage of the legislation the administration has identified in an explicit way in which conditions must be satisfied for persons applying in a legitimate manner for land. “We are not taking away anybody’s rights,” he stressedPeople’s National Congress Reform (PNCR) frontbencher Deborah Backer in her opening remarks during the debate on the Bill said that “the only thing simple about this bill is that it will be passed with a simple majority.”“Simple it seems but this Act will have very profound effect on hundreds,Giacomo Bonaventura Jersey, we in fact feel thousands … throughout the length of this country!” Backer asserted emphatically.She said that given the repercussions of the enactment of the legislation,Matteo Darmian Jersey, PNCR Leader Robert Corbin who is also the leader of the Parliamentary Opposition had written to the Prime Minister who heads the Government side of the House and the Subject Minister seeking a deferral so that there could be further consultations..This was not to be, and Ramson in his rebuttal said that he received the request at 10:30hrs yesterday and did not see the wisdom proffered in Corbin’s argument, and as such, a deferral was not granted.Backer argued that the Act “increases the already weighted power government has…It is now saying that regardless of how long you have been on the land you cannot get it prescriptively.”The PNCR Member of Parliament pointed out that not only can citizens not apply for the land, it allows for government as well as companies which the government has a vested interest in to move for a citizen’s property.“Hand in hand with the increase in power it is now even more oppressive…with this you can never prescribe but they could prescribe over your land in 12 years.”It is stipulated in the proposed legislation that any pending applications to the court at the time of the enactment of the amendments would not be affected, but Backer questioned what will happen to the thousands of persons that have lived on the land in some cases for more than 30 years.The Bill could take away land from people who have had same for generations, according to Backer.To this insinuation PPP/C Member of Parliament Anil Nandlall in his presentation sought to alleviate fears, adding that the administration has a policy to deal with the situation.He said that the government regularises areas and relocates with adequate compensation where necessary.He pointed out that