So when the "war vets" seize a farm, and the all the "paperwork is in order" it is legal?

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
So when the "war vets" seize a farm, and the all the "paperwork is in order" it is legal?

It'd probably be what passes for legal in Zimbobwe but as most, if not all of the 'new owners' are on the banned list of the USA & some other countries then hunting on such land would probably be illegal for hunters from many countries including the USA.

Getting back to PHASA etc: If you still think PHASA could do something, what do you think they could/should do and on what grounds do you think they could do it?

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
So when the "war vets" seize a farm, and the all the "paperwork is in order" it is legal?

Possession is 9/10 ths of the law.

So it would be about 9/10 ths legal?

quote:

Originally posted by Muletrain:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
So when the "war vets" seize a farm, and the all the "paperwork is in order" it is legal?

Possession is 9/10 ths of the law.

So it would be about 9/10 ths legal?

Is that a bit like being slightly pregnant?

quote:

Originally posted by shakari:

quote:

Originally posted by Muletrain:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
So when the "war vets" seize a farm, and the all the "paperwork is in order" it is legal?

Possession is 9/10 ths of the law.

So it would be about 9/10 ths legal?

Is that a bit like being slightly pregnant?

No. It's like being mostly pregnant. LOL.

quote:

Originally posted by Muletrain:

quote:

Originally posted by shakari:

quote:

Originally posted by Muletrain:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
So when the "war vets" seize a farm, and the all the "paperwork is in order" it is legal?

Possession is 9/10 ths of the law.

So it would be about 9/10 ths legal?

Is that a bit like being slightly pregnant?

No. It's like being mostly pregnant. LOL.

quote:

Originally posted by shakari:

quote:

Originally posted by Muletrain:

quote:

Originally posted by shakari:

quote:

Originally posted by Muletrain:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
So when the "war vets" seize a farm, and the all the "paperwork is in order" it is legal?

Possession is 9/10 ths of the law.

So it would be about 9/10 ths legal?

Is that a bit like being slightly pregnant?

No. It's like being mostly pregnant. LOL.

That is all pretty funny . . . not. I wonder if good folks like Richard and Brita Harland who had farms seized that had been in their families for decades will get a good chuckle of that. I also wonder what the attitude of South Africans will be when their day of reckoning arrives and they have vultures from other countries picking over their bones at the hands of corrupt politicians. My guess is that it will all be different at that point . . . it always is when it is your own ox that is being gored.

Mike

Not only do I note you suffer from the same lack of sense of humour and inability to read a post correctly (no one was laughing at land seizure, they were laughing at other things) as Matt but I also note you've failed to answer the question I've asked you twice before so I'll ask it again:

If you still think PHASA could do something, what do you think they could/should do and on what grounds do you think they could do it?

While we are all asking questions, let me ask you one. If PHASA wanted to act, do you think PHASA would find a way to act?

You are an interesting fellow. I note in your discussions, when it is clear that you are losing ground you always resort to name calling, e.g., folks lacking brain cells to rub together, inability to read, etc. That speaks volumes about the efficacy of your points. When what you saying is not carrying the day, you just say it louder.

Mike

So you choose not to answer my question then?

Just to remind you yet again. I asked: If you still think PHASA could do something, what do you think they could/should do and on what grounds do you think they could do it?

I've already answered your question (several times) but will be delighted to answer it again:

PHASA can only (currently) act if they A) Have absolute proof that laws have been broken and that would mean someone being found guilty in a court of law where the crime took place and B) if someone makes a complaint about it. I'll add a C) in that they can only do something if the accused is actually a member and a D) to say the most they can do is remove membership either temporarily or permanently.

Nothing whatsoever can happen until someone is found guilty of a crime in a court of law in the country where the crime took place. It really isn't complicated but you seem to think PHASA have considerably more clout than they currently do...... As I've also repeatedly said, I'm all for catching and punishing these buggers but the truth is nothing will or can happen without that aforementioned court case in Zim and that ain't ever going to happen!

Mike

If you check my previous posts you'll see that I'm not suggesting no-one should do anything about the situation. I'd love to see these dodgy bastards bought to justice but my point is PHASA don't have the legal power to do anything at all unless they have absolute proof and a complaint against a member and even then, they can do precious little because someone like that won't care a fig about being expelled.

What it needs is a court case, a guilty verdict and a significant sentence not only for the illegally operating PH but also for everyone else involved including the person who took the bribe and the person who arranged it...... and my point is that won't happen in the foreseeable future because of the way things are in Zimbabwe.

As for the client.... that's a very sticky problem and possibly part of the reason no prosecution takes place. Jail him and the hunting world gets very chary about hunting in Zim or let him go and the accused want the same treatment.