NAIROBI, Kenya Jul 2 – The High Court has rejected an application by Kenya Railways seeking approval to proceed with the eviction of residents living at Nairobi’s Muthurwa Estate, citing failure to satisfy constitutional requirements governing forced evictions.

📻 Breaking It Down

In the case, the court ruled that although Kenya Railways remains the legitimate owner of the property, any attempt to remove residents must strictly comply with constitutional protections on housing and human dignity.

The petitioners, many of whom have occupied the estate for decades as tenants of the corporation, challenged the planned evictions on grounds that the required legal safeguards had not been adequately implemented.

In its determination, the court revisited earlier orders issued on August 26, 2013, which outlined conditions under which any eviction exercise could lawfully be carried out. The directives barred evictions at night, during adverse weather, public holidays, festivals, or school examination periods, while recommending that any relocation be undertaken during school holidays to minimize disruption to children.

📌 What You Need to Know

The earlier judgment also prohibited the use of indiscriminate force or actions that could endanger residents during the process.

After the 2013 ruling, both parties engaged in mediation discussions aimed at developing an agreed eviction framework. However, negotiations failed to produce a settlement, prompting Kenya Railways to return to court in May 2014 seeking directions on how the eviction should proceed.

In December 2015, the court ordered residents to vacate the premises by April 30, 2016, while simultaneously directing the State to provide details within 60 days on policies and legislation governing forced evictions, demolitions, and the protection of rights related to housing and sanitation.

More than ten years later, the court noted that no sufficient evidence had been presented to show what legal or policy measures the government had established to regulate forced evictions and guarantee constitutional protections for affected communities.

The judge observed that the absence of such safeguards meant the court could not authorize the eviction process.

The ruling further stressed that all conditions contained in previous court orders must be fully implemented before any relocation exercise can proceed, adding that selective or partial compliance with the directives would not be accepted.

📰 Source: Capital FM Kenya