     and available in local languages. Reports were received of construction taking place on paddy land or farmland, without the necessary documentation, including land conversion approval. Private companies noted that receiving the land conversion approval for farm or paddy land was “impossible” due to administrative delays, bribery, and in some cases farmers lacking requisite documentation needed to apply for the conversion. However a regional-level minister expressed awareness of the complexity of the approval process, and suggested that regional-level Government is working to ease the process for both landowners and companies engaged in the roll-out. For tower construction, interviews indicated a relatively consistent process was followed by most companies that resulted in a signed lease for land owners:  A ‘site hunter’ comes to the home/farm to investigate the land and suitability for a tower site.  If suitable, they discuss with the village leader/administrator their intention to build on the land, how much land they will need (usually about 50 square metres) and where, how long construction will take (usually a 28 day target), and their rental and compensation rates.  The village leader/administrator and site hunter(s) discuss with the land owner their intention to build the tower:  The company usually facilitated the process of getting the land registered as “grant land” under the required Form 105. (If paddy land, this was first applied for at regional level, then approved at national level before it could be issued). This generally took 1-2 months  The landowner must get the signed consent of (usually 2-4) immediate neighbours confirming they do not object to the construction  A contract (usually a land lease) is signed between the landowner and company. Fees and costs for registering as grant land were generally incorporated into the lease agreement (not putting land owners out of pocket), but the fees and costs cited varied greatly from 500 MMK ($0.46) up to 40 MML ($3,709), by location. It was often the tower site hunter’s or village leader/administrator’s job to verify who was the true land owner: • Citizenship Scrutiny cards, Household Lists, and land titles were cited as among key initial documents sought. However, there are still high risks of misidentifying ‘true’ land ownership in Myanmar even using such evidence, given wide-spread practice of customary ownership and the fact that Myanmar only recently completed its first census in 30 years, which is still widely regarded as problematic because inter alia people in some areas of armed conflict and intercommunal violence were not counted. • Depending on the circumstances, companies may bring in local lawyers to meet the land owner and assist them in applying for the needed documents. • Researchers heard general estimates that around 10% of prospective sites fail because documents cannot be obtained. • Researchers heard of some cases in which Myanmar officials obliquely requested bribes in order to return the proper documentation. Though contracts were commonly signed with landowners confirming the lease arrangements, a copy of the contract was often not provided to the land owner and researchers were regularly told by land owners that they did not fully understand the content of what they were signing. • Most contracts appeared to include automatic renewal clauses, meaning unless the landowner gives notice of their wish to cancel or renegotiate the agreement prior to the completion of the agreed term they will automatically be CHAPTER 4.7: LAND 217 4 4.7