Diego Martin farmers get injunction against Udecott

Diego Martin farmer Avellino Thomas, stands outside a bulldozed section of land at Mahogany Trace on September 3. The land, occupied by his family for agricultural use, has been designated for the second phase of the Diego Martin Sporting Complex by Udecott. - Photo by Angelo Marcelle
Diego Martin farmer Avellino Thomas, stands outside a bulldozed section of land at Mahogany Trace on September 3. The land, occupied by his family for agricultural use, has been designated for the second phase of the Diego Martin Sporting Complex by Udecott. - Photo by Angelo Marcelle

JUSTICE Christopher Sieuchand has granted a temporary injunction barring the Urban Development Corporation of TT (Udecott) from entering, using, or working on state land that famers claim they have occupied for over 50 years.

The land, repossessed by Udecott on September 3, is located at the corner of Mahogany Trace and Savannah Trace #2 in Diego Martin, and farmers Mark Salandy, 67, and Avelino Thomas, 46, have filed an ex-parte application with the High Court, arguing the land is essential for their families' livelihoods.

Documents obtained by Newsday states that Udecott must stop all activities on the land and not interfere with the farmers' use of it until the case is fully heard.The company was ordered to remove locks and all equipment and material off the land immediately.

The document dated September 6 also names Attorney General Reginald Armour as a third defendant. Both men were given until October 25 to file their case.

On September 3, Udecott began demolishing infrastructure and cutting down crops on the land.The disputed land has been designated for the second phase of the Diego Martin Sporting Complex.

A statement from Udecott on September 3 said it had secured the lands to begin construction work and said the land will complement the phase one project strategically, providing educational, sporting and recreational facilities for the community.

It listed a homework centre, children's play park, a community playfield, two multi-purpose hard courts, a swimming pool, a pavilion, public washrooms and an electric kiosk approved to be built on the land.

Udecott said the repossessed land had been occupied by three "illegal occupiers" who were engaged in agricultural production.

Newsday visited the site on Tuesday and spoke with two of the occupiers.

One who asked not to be named said they were served with an eviction notice on August 30. He claimed the notice was not given to an individual but was stuck on the fence.

He said he got a call from a subcontractor on September 2 and was told demolition would take place on the morning of September 3.

"They proceeded to use the backhoe to plough through the eggplants, straight to a shed we had used to hold chemicals. They then came through the fig and then the soursop and the sweet peppers."

Thomas said negotiations between Udecott and the farmers began in 2020, which was also corroborated by a statement from Udecott on September 3.

Thomas said owing to covid, negotiations stalled but restarted this year and focused on relocation, which they did not mind, as long as the new location was equal to the Savannah Trace land.

"They said they had a spot in the Chaguaramas Development Authority (CDA)."

He said both parties went to Chaguaramas to view the land and were given a CDA application form to apply for the land.

After viewing the land and having talks with the family, he said they did not accept the offer because the land was not cleared.

"Even while we were on the land, I told Udecott and the CDA this was a backward step."

He said they did not have the resources to clear the land and they spoke with a representative who asked if the land was cleared if they would apply, to which he replied, "We would consider it."

Thomas said roughly in July or August, Udecott had a meeting with them at the Diego Martin Sporting Complex. and the company brought an agreement that stated the Tucker Valley land would be cleared and water "organised."

"We asked for the land cleared, water, electricity and a paved road, because that's what we have here. We cannot negotiate for less. It has to be exact or better." They did not sign the agreement.

He claimed Udecott then began "jumbieing" him asking for proof of occupancy on the land.

"We were in the process of that. We have authorisation from the Ministry of Agriculture – for agricultural purposes – and authorisation from (the Commissioner of) State Lands – for occupation to make agriculture."

Udecott's statement said one of the three occupiers accepted a parcel of land and compensation for his crops.

It also claimed, "The two other occupiers refused the offer of land and compensation for the existing crops, instead requesting exorbitant sums of over $1.1 million each.

Thomas refuted Udecott's claims and said compensation was never agreed on for him and his uncle. He claimed he was offered $11,000 for the crops on the land, and that offer was later doubled.

Udecott's statement concluded, "The community would be able to enjoy use of the homework centre, playfield and hard courts in December and the remaining facilities in 2025."

Comments

"Diego Martin farmers get injunction against Udecott"

More in this section