Northern Kenya

Relief for Isiolo residents as appellate court suspends eviction orders

Noor Ahmed Ismail was found guilty by Justice John Onyiego of Garissa High Court after a trial that lasted eight years. (Photo: EV)

By Waweru Wairimu | Saturday, June 8, 2024

A judgement last November found that they illegally acquired the land and ordered their eviction, but the appellate court in Nyeri County has issued stay orders following a petition by the county government.

More than 100 Isiolo County residents occupying acres of disputed land in Mwangaza were reprieved on Friday by a court ruling staying orders for their eviction.

A judgement last November found that they illegally acquired the properties and ordered their eviction, but the appellate court in Nyeri County has issued stay orders pending the hearing of a petition by the county government.

Keep reading

The Environment and Land Court in Isiolo had ordered the Kenya Airports Authority (KAA) to pay 189 residents Sh413.9 million as compensation for the violation of their rights and damages suffered due to the loss of their land compulsorily acquired by the state in the 2000s to facilitate the expansion of the Isiolo International Airport.

Isiolo Judge Peter Njoroge also directed the agency, the Land Cabinet Secretary, the National Land Commission (NLC), and the Attorney General to, within 90 days, place the petitioners into possession of their respective parcels of land as had been allocated during a balloting exercise by the defunct county council.

The petitioners had told the court that they were unable to repossess their land due to invasion by hostile third parties and that they had been landless for nearly 20 years yet had not received any compensation.

The aggrieved group moved to the Court of Appeal immediately after the November 27, 2023, landmark ruling, but it was the county government's recent appeal that granted them some relief.

In the county's appeal, Adan Jirma and 188 others, the Land CS, the AG, the NLC, and the KAA, have been listed as respondents.

The devolved government argued that the Environment and Land Court judge disregarded the proprietary rights of third parties occupying the disputed land.

"They were condemned and unheard, and the judge erred in issuing orders of vacant possession, yet the land was compulsorily acquired in tandem with the dictates of Article 40 of the Constitution," states the county's March 27 application challenging the judgement of the Environment and Land Court.

The appellant argued that third parties occupied the land in 2000 "following an allocation to them", and that on it were public utilities such as hospitals and schools, so implementing the eviction order would cause chaos and breach.

In the ruling on Friday, judges Wanjiru Karanja, Aggrey Muchelule, and Luka Kiprotich Kimaru allowed the application and consequently stayed the Environment and Land Court judgement pending the hearing and determination of the appeal.

The status quo remains.