{"id":106034,"date":"2020-08-29T14:55:30","date_gmt":"2020-08-29T21:55:30","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/?p=106034"},"modified":"2020-08-29T14:55:30","modified_gmt":"2020-08-29T21:55:30","slug":"one-law-for-all-e-register-with-bim-saviya-australian-torrens-law","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/2020\/08\/29\/one-law-for-all-e-register-with-bim-saviya-australian-torrens-law\/","title":{"rendered":"One law for all \u2013 e Register with Bim Saviya [Australian Torrens law]."},"content":{"rendered":"

By Senior Lawyer Sri Lanka Study Circle [ srilankastudycircle@yahoo.com ]<\/strong><\/em><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n

Parliament has enacted legislative framework for the e register [ e\u00a0 LR ] modeled on the\u00a0 Australian \u2018Torrens System\u2019 of title registration (Registration of Titles Act No. 21 of 1998, popularised as Bim Saviya \/ Title Registration ).\u00a0 This has convulsive \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0changes to our land law. The Act 21 of 1998 ,\u00a0 is more or less a copy paste version of the original statute introduced in\u00a0\u00a0 1858 in Australia.\u00a0 It \u00a0does not include any of the\u00a0 amendments made subsequently \u00a0by\u00a0 the Australian Government to make the e register comprehensive compulsory and free of fraud .\u00a0 <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Although the public   have a right to information under the                               \u2019 \u2018Right to\nInformation  Act 12 of 2016\u2019 , there is very\nlittle dissemination of knowledge to the public and the lawyers with regard to\nthis law.  If  the  e\nregister is  governed by the Australian\nlaw,  the   land rights under  the personal laws ,   other\nlaws  that permit  shared interest and  servitudes enjoyed by land owners mainly for\nagricultural purposes  will not be accommodated\n.   <\/p>\n\n\n\n

It\nis therefore the duty of patriotic and public-spirited politicians,\nadministrators, lawyers and media leaders to vitalise  the  Sri\nLankan law with necessary amendments specifically to prevent fraud to enable\neffective administration of the  e\nregister  .<\/p>\n\n\n\n

 \u2018 One law for all\u2019 ?<\/strong> . <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

 An  \nowner  registered in the e\nregister, under Bim Saviya has  conclusive indefeasible<\/strong> ownership [\nSection 33  Act 21 of  1998 ]which cannot be questioned in a court\nof law   and cannot be challenged in a\ncourt of law,  even  if the owner received title by way of a forged\ndeed or  even if the owner did  not receive \nrights under the  personal laws.  Section 73 \nAct 21 of 1998 expresses the superiority of the Bim Saviya law states \u2018\nthe provisions of this law shall have effect notwithstanding any other law. \u2018  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The    <\/strong>Samarasekera\nreport  consisting of expert lawyers\nappointed by President Mahinda Rajapakse \nto investigate in to this law   declares that\nthe <\/p>\n\n\n\n

 \u2018 Bim Saviya law can be maintained only if the\ncustomary and statutory inheritance laws of our country  are made inapplicable.\u2019 Can this be done? <\/strong><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bim Saviya  \ncompels   registration of only  one owner for a block of land and  will not register  complex ownership rights  under our \ncustomary law or personal laws , Ande cultivation right  ,  law\nof preemption  , rights to plantation,\nrights to chena lands  etc . Samarasekera\nreport concludes that\ncompulsory registration under Bim Saviya    is   an\nimpossible task and totally unworkable\u2019. \nThe Title Commissioner\n [ officer appointed to register owners\nunder the new law Bim Saviya ]after 20 years  confirms the view states in the 2018 report that\n   1.9 million blocks   could\nnot be   converted to Bim Saviya  since they were governed by coownership rights\nand customary laws  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

If further convincing is necessary\nreaders are advised to read the World\nBank\u2019s ICR report it states   Sri Lanka\u2019s\ntitling project is a failure. <\/strong>The project\nonly issued titles for parcels with clear land rights and deliberately shied\naway from problem parcels and from helping people in the field work out their\nproblems . As a result the project failed to improve the adjudication process. http:\/\/documents1.worldbank.org\/curated\/en\/996161474635250504\/pdf\/000020051-20140617135844.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This situation has caught Sri Lanka\nbetween two stools. The country has two systems of law . The vexatious old law\nthat requires immediate  revision  and   Bim Saviya which is economically unaffordable\n.   This has confused and disturbed land owners  including the judiciary with many court cases\ninstituted and pending.  During   court proceedings  ,  the\ndefendants produce conclusive Bim Saviya Certificates to prove ownership, where\nthe Title Commissioner the Government\u2019s  adjudicator\n had gone ahead to  conclude ownership , without the   knowledge of the law .    <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Proceeding with\nBim Saviya against all legal advice  <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Fifteen\nyears ago the Bar Association  made\namendments to Act 21 of 1998  thereafter   Samarasekera report   concluded \n that the imposition of compulsory\ninvestigation of title will create thousands of land disputes. .<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Contrary\nto the  legal advice given  Government   continued and as predicted  the effort to implement Bim Saviya  with a non legal process failed.  The \ncost of this futile exercise was exorbitant with the  government having to  visit \nall land owners  making plans and\nadjudicating rights .  For  20 years only 0.72 Million blocks were\nregistered  in the Bim Saviya register\nout of 12 Million blocks of land.  With\nthat conversion indicator  it will take\nover 100 years to implement the law  for\nthe e register.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What happens to\nthe land coming under the MCC  project<\/strong>?  As per proposal       [\nAnnex 1 page 21]  there would be only 5\nMillion  people benefitting after 20\nyears .What happens to the others  and\nhow long is the project ?.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Judicial    adjudication of  legal ownership rights entrusted to the  administration <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The\npost of  commissioner of Title Settlement\nwas  created to mandatorily    investigate \nownership of all land owners converting   land rights of  both private  and government land owners to the Bim Saviya\nlaw.  The law   compels the owners to   forego\ntheir  deeds to be exchanged to  certificates All  future land   transactions[such as sale and gifts etc]  are  to\nbe made on Transaction Forms<\/strong>\npublished in the  Gazette 1886\/58   dated 31.10. 2014 , The statutory  forms published in the gazette  have no \nprovision to recite the servitude rights or other shared rights under\npersonal laws as they  cannot be included\nin the  register .  The Bim Saviya has provision to destroy\nnotarised land transactions and they are not returned to owners.  Section 53 provides to destruction of  land transactions,   as the register  by law has to erase the history of  ownership \nto reflect only the owner and is therefore named as  \u2018 Mirror Title\u2019\u2019.     . <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

New procedure to\nreduce court actions under Bim Saviya Section 60 of Act 21 of 1998  <\/strong><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Surprisingly a new   alien law has come into operation called the  statutory \u2018Assurance Fund\u2019 .  Government has to be responsible    to pay compensation to owners  aggrieved by registration under  Bim Saviya . If the owners lose their rights\nunder Bim Saviya ;  they may not  get back their  house or land they have lost , they can  obtain compensation from the Assurance Fund.   A poor substitute for the loss of their   fundamental right to access  court to seek redress.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The law of Bim Saviya  referred\nto as Torrens law  had operated in Australian\n  for over a century and the Australia\u2019s  Government\u2019s \u2018 Assurance Fund\u2019   has\nsufficient funds to compensate owners . [  Victoria registry in  1981 -87 made a gross profit of Au Dollars\n189.5 million New South wales of Au Dollars \n249.5 Million of which 50 Million was gross profit  as the    fund\nis  maintained with the  fees collected from land owners.]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The phenomenal cost of registering land under Bim Saviya <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

 To\nregister land in Australia under the Torrens law [ Bim Saviya ] it cost\napproximately 180 AUD for a  land owner,\nas owners have to maintain the  Assurance\nfund.    Land registry has  already commenced charging fees for\nregistration to build the  Assurance\nfund.  Is this economically viable for a\npoor country?.  Sri Lanka  Government has to find the funds to establish\nthe Assurance Fund  , as the MCC  will not grant funds for the establishment of\nthe Assurance fund or the implementation of Bim Saviya .  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

USA in Several States have rejected the law <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

 Several\nstates in USA had  rejected this law as\nthey did not agree that   the  fundamental rights to access court  should be  replaced with a law that requires a  Government Assurance fund to pay  compensation to owners.   Throughout its thirty-five years of existence\nin USA  has at most been only sporadically\nsuccessful  https:\/\/core.ac.uk\/download\/pdf\/151518291.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sri Lanka need to be  cautious\nas   over-reliance   on funding agencies and their legal advice\nmay not be the best way forward .  <\/strong> <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

According to the MCC draft document the  government has been unsuccessful <\/strong> in the\nimplementation of  Bim Saviya.    MCC however advises  to   continue with the failed law  Bim Saviya \nwith amendments [The MCC  Annex 1\n—34]   <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The suggested\namendments  are ,  ironically to re introduce the rights that\nare best available under our law and the deed system .   Why introduce a law alien to the country and\namend the law to return to the existing law ?.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Other nations have\nmade the same mistake<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sri Lanka has to learn from others experience.  Several nations have made the mistake\nand  is regretting . To remedy the\nsituation they are repeatedly   introducing \n amendments to their Torrens statutes.\nTheir judiciaries are compelled   to encounter unknown legal issues.  Malaysian and Singapore has exposed the law\nwhere   criminals gain land rights .    The system is based on\nthe law of  Australia in the 19th century\nand is totally inadequate to deal with the challenged of the  21st<\/sup> century https:\/\/www.accaglobal.com\/hk\/en\/member\/member\/accounting-business\/2019\/04\/in-focus\/land-fraud.html<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Singapore A law which favours forgers:\nLand fraud in two Torrens jurisdictions  https:\/\/ink.library.smu.edu.sg\/sol_research\/2325\/<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Why are successive governments \nignoring the advice of  Sri  Lankan Lawyers  for the implementation of an effective e\nregister  with the Sri Lankan law <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The e register [ e  LR ]  will be \n completed very soon and e\nregister could operate with the law of our country.   The  advice of the Sri Lankan lawyers has been  to revise and amend the law. Sri Lanka\nrequires laws to maintain the integrity of the register free of fraud  for the  safety of the owners  registered in the e register .   <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The expert advice from lawyers are given in ——-<\/strong> <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

 <\/strong>1]<\/strong> Samarasekera Committee Report\n.  A committee appointed by President\nMahinda Rajapakse   has given  expert advice which will not economically\nburden the  government. They\nrecommend  to   do away with compulsory  conversion recommended by Bim Saviya.  Concludes that  it \nis   impossible task and totally\nunworkable\u2019. The Law Reform Commission has also consistently opposed compulsory\nimplementation of the law.   The committee recommends that the implementation\nbe initially voluntary.     <\/strong>2]<\/strong> \nThe amendments to the colonial statutes  \nby a committee appointed by the Ministry of Justice to prevent fraud [when\nMr Milinda  Morogoda was the Minster]   3]<\/strong> Amendments to the Bim Saviya Act 21   1998\nby the  Bar Association 4]<\/strong> Reports from the Banks of Sri Lanka  <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

If\nwe are compelled to introduce the   Australian law  at least follow Australian Practice <\/p>\n\n\n\n

If we are compelled to proceed\nwith  Bim Saviya  for the 11 Million blocks remaining ,  having failed in the project for  20 years, the Government should not ignore to\nassess the period required and the cost  \nand should not ignore  the years\nof research  made in  Australia to improve the Torrens law made,  by the    Australian<\/em> Registrars’ National Electronic Conveyancing\nCouncil (ARNECC)  and  the  Property Exchange Australia Ltd (PEXA) which gives publicity and\ndirections to lawyers and the public <\/p>\n\n\n\n

It would be also important to observe that Australia has recognized\nthe  customary laws of the people. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

 Customary rights were recognised recently\non the  3rd<\/sup> of  June 1992. , High Court of Australia  ruled \nthat the lands of this continent were not terra nullius or \u2018land\nbelonging to no-one\u2019 when European settlement occurred, and that the  people were ‘entitled to their customary\nrights possession, occupation, use and enjoyment of  the lands  Mabo v. Queensland <\/em> . <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

By Senior Lawyer Sri Lanka Study Circle [ srilankastudycircle@yahoo.com ] Parliament has enacted legislative framework for the e register [ e\u00a0 LR ] modeled on the\u00a0 Australian \u2018Torrens System\u2019 of title registration (Registration of Titles Act No. 21 of 1998, popularised as Bim Saviya \/ Title Registration ).\u00a0 This has convulsive \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0changes to our land […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":true,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[162],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-106034","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-sri-lanka-study-circle"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/106034","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=106034"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/106034\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=106034"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=106034"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=106034"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}