DOCSLIB.ORG

Assessing the Effectiveness of the National Land Commision In

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Assessing the Effectiveness of the National Land Commision In ASSESSING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE NATIONAL LAND COMMISION IN ADDRESSING IRREGULAR AND ILLEGAL ALLOCATION OF LAND IN KENYA Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Award of the Degree of Master of Laws (LL.M) of the University of Nairobi. BY: BETTY ATIENO G62/67803/2013 SUPERVISOR: JOY K. ASIEMA NOVEMBER, 2016 i DECLARATION I BETTY ATIENO do hereby declare that this thesis is my original work and has not been presented for the award of a degree or any other award in any other University. Where works by other people have been used, references have been provided. Name: Betty Atieno Registration Number: G62/67803/2013 Signature _______________________________ Date: _____________________________ This Thesis has been submitted for examination with my approval as the University Supervisor. Name: JOY K. ASIEMA Signature _______________________________ Date: _____________________________ University of Nairobi, School of Law Parklands Campus, Nairobi. ii DEDICATION This thesis is dedicated to my loving father and mother for their love and prayers have brought me this far. To my daughter Joy Valerie, no daughter could make a mother proud than you have made me. To my husband Sam thanks for everything. iii ACKNOWLEGEMENT I wish to acknowledge assistance and contribution of those who participated in encouraging me to put this thesis together. I acknowledge the contribution of my supervisor, Joy K Asiema for her guidance and insights during the study period. Along withmy hard working supervisors who played a big role during the writing process. I am grateful to Brenda and Sheila for their assistance in interviewing contributors during the data collection. To the interviewees who participated thank you. I also wish to thank my friends and colleagues at work for their moral support during the study. Finally I wish to thank my family for their ever-unfailing support. Special thanks to my mother Margaret and father Rev. Fanuel Nyambuoro for their prayers and encouragement gave me the strength to complete this thesis. Above all I thank the Almighty God for this far he has brought me. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Contents DEDICATION ............................................................................................................................ III TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................. V ACKNOWLEGMENT…...…………………………………………………………………… IV ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………………………………. VIII 1.1 CHAPTER ONE ...................................................................................................................... 1 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY .................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 THE PROBLEM STATEMENT ....................................................................................................................... 6 1.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY ........................................................................................................................ 7 1.3.1 GENERAL OBJECTIVE ................................................................................................................................................... 7 1.3.2 SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES ....................................................................................................................................................... 8 1.4 RESEARCH QUESTIONS ................................................................................................................................ 8 1.5 HYPOTHESIS .................................................................................................................................................. 9 1.6 JUSTIFICATION TO THE STUDY .................................................................................................................. 9 1.7 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ...................................................................................................................... 9 1.8 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................................... 11 1.9 LIMITATION TO THE STUDY ..................................................................................................................... 12 1.10 THESIS OUTLINE ........................................................................................................................................ 13 2.0 CHAPTER TWO ................................................................................................................. 15 2.1 LITERATURE REVIEW .................................................................................................. 15 2.2 PROCESSES USED TO ILLEGALLY/IRREGULARLY ACQUIRE LAND IN KENYA ..... 17 2.2.1 LETTERS OF ALLOTMENT ......................................................................................................................................... 21 2.2.2 ILLEGAL/IRREGULAR ALLOCATIONS OF ALIENATED PUBLIC LAND .......................................................... 23 2.2.3 PURCHASE OF ILLEGALLY ACQUIRED PUBLIC LAND BY STATE CORPORATIONS/PARASTATALS ..... 23 v 2.2.4 ALLOCATION OF LAND BY UNAUTHORISED PERSONS .................................................................................... 24 2.2.5 UNJUSTIFIED EXCISIONS OF PROTECTED AREAS .............................................................................................. 26 2.3 NDUNG’U COMMISSION REPORT SOLUTIONS FOR ILLEGAL AND IRREGULAR LAND ALLOCATIONS .......................................................................................................................... 30 CHAPTER 3 ................................................................................................................................. 32 THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK FOR ILLEGAL AND IRREGULAR LAND ALLOCATION ............................................................................................................................ 32 3.1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................................. 32 3.1.1 THE CONSTITUTION OF KENYA ................................................................................................................................. 32 3.1.2 THE LAND REGISTRATION ACT ................................................................................................................................. 34 3.1.3 THE LAND ACT ............................................................................................................................................................... 36 3.1.4 NATIONAL LAND COMMISSION ACT ................................................................................................................... 38 3.2 THE NATIONAL LAND COMMISSION ..................................................................................................... 39 3.2.1 CAPACITY OF THE COMMISSION ................................................................................................................................ 41 CHAPTER FOUR ....................................................................................................................... 46 4.0 PERFORMANCE OF THE NATIONAL LAND COMMISSION IN ADDRESSING IRREGULAR AND ILLEGAL LAND ALLOCATION ......................................................... 46 4.1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 46 4.2 REVIEW OF GRANTS AND DISPOSITIONS OF PUBLIC LAND IN LAMU…….43 4.3 CASE LAW ON REVIEWS UNDERTAKEN BY THE COMMISSION………….... 55 4.4 THE INADEQUACIES OF THE NATIONAL LAND COMMISSION IN CURBING ILLEGAL AND IRREGULAR LAND ALLOCATIONS .......................................................................................... 62 4.4.1 Lack of Capacity……………………………………………………………...… 59 4.4.2 Lack of Political Goodwill and the Vague Mandate of the NLC………………. 59 4.4.3 National Land Commission’s Powers to Investigate Land Injustices………….. 60 4.5 RECOMMENDATIONS FROM INTERVIEWEES ........................................................................ 65 CHAPTER FIVE ......................................................................................................................... 68 5.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................ 68 5.1.1 CREATE A NATIONAL LAND COMMISSION FUND ............................................................................... 68 vi 5.1.2 CLARIFY NLC’S MANDATE VIS-À-VIS THE MINISTRY OF LANDS’ MANDATE ................................. 69 5.1.3 AMEND ARTICLE 67(2)(E) OF THE CONSTITUTION ........................................................................... 69 5.1.4 DIGITIZATION OF LAND RECORDS ......................................................................................................... 70 5.1.5 OPERATIONAL GUIDELINES .................................................................................................................... 71 5.1.6 INCREASED CAPACITY ............................................................................................................................. 71 5.2 CONCLUSION .............................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Critical Analysis of the Extent to Which the National Land Commission Addresses the Land Question in Kenya
    A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE NATIONAL LAND COMMISSION ADDRESSES THE LAND QUESTION IN KENYA. BY ERIC MULEVU G62/75293/2014 THESIS Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Of Master of Laws (L.L.M) In The University of Nairobi Nairobi, Kenya. Supervisor: PROFESSOR KAMERI -MBOTE ii Declaration of Originality 1. I understand what plagiarism is and I am aware of the university’s policy in this regard. 2. I declare that this thesis is my original work and has not been submitted elsewhere for examination, or in the award of a degree or publication. Where other people’s work or my own work has been used, this has properly been acknowledged and referenced in accordance with the University of Nairobi’s requirements. 3. I have not sought or used the services of any professional agencies to produce this work. 4. I have not allowed, and shall not allow anyone to copy my work with the intention of passing it off his/her own work. 5. I understand that any false claim in respect of this work shall result in disciplinary action, in accordance with the University of Nairobi’s plagiarism policy. Name : Patricia Kameri- Mbote Signature…………………………………………………………………………………………... Date…………………………………………………………………………………………….. Name…………………………………………………………………………………………. Signature…………………………………………………………………………………………... Date…………………………………………………………………………………………….. iii List of Statutes The Constitution of Kenya 2010. National Land Commission Act, 2012 The Land Act, 2012. Land Registration Act, 2012 Case Laws 1Abdulkadir Khalif vs Principal secretary and Others. Reference no. 479/2017, High Court NLC vs AG & Others, Advisory Opinion. Reference no.2/2014, Supreme Court. NLC vs Ex-Parte Leting Jr.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Nlc Research Framework
    NATIONAL LAND COMMISSION LAND ENVIRONMENT AND RESEARCH COMMITTEE COMMISSION PAPER 6 NATIONAL LAND COMMISSION RESEARCH FRAMEWORK. July 2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ..................................................................................... 3 DEFINITIONS ............................................................................................................................... 4 CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................... 1 1.1 Preamble .......................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Vision ............................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Mission............................................................................................................................ 1 1.4 Research Philosophy ...................................................................................................... 2 1.5 Scope of the Framework ..................................................................................................... 4 1.6 Purpose of Research Framework ................................................................................ 4 1.7 Objectives of the Research Framework ....................................................................... 4 1.8 Organogram of the Commission ................................................................................. 6 CHAPTER
    [Show full text]
  • Reflections from Kenya's 2010 Transformative Constitution
    Developing Progressive African Jurisprudence: Reflections from Kenya’s 2010 Transformative Constitution 2017 LAMECK GOMA ANNUAL LECTURE Lusaka, Zambia, July 27, 2017 Willy Mutunga1 Preliminary Remarks Chair of SAIPAR Members of the Institute I thank the Southern African Institute for Policy and Research (SAIPAR) for inviting me to give the PROFESSOR LAMECK GOMA ANNUAL LECTURE 2017. The late Professor Goma was a great scholar, the first Zambian Vice-Chancellor of the University of Zambia. He was also a great researcher and a patriotic public servant. 1 Dr. Willy Mutunga is the former Chief Justice of the Republic of Kenya and the President of the Supreme Court of Kenya. A major part of my remarks are taken from a speech I gave to Judges and guests of the Kenyan Judiciary on the occasion of the launching the Judiciary Transformation Framework on May 31, 2012. That speech has been published in the Socialist Lawyer: Magazine of the Haldane Society of Socialist Lawyers. Number 65. 2013,20. The journey of my thoughts since then and now reflected in this Lecture owes a great debt of intellectual, ideological and political gratitude to the following mentors and friends: Professors Jill Ghai, Yash Ghai, Sylvia Tamale, Joel Ngugi, James Gathii, Joe Oloka-Onyango, Issa Shivji, Makau Mutua, Obiora Okafor, Yash Tandon, David Bilchitz, Albie Sachs, Duncan Okello, Roger Van Zwanenberg, and Shermit Lamba. My Law Clerks at the Supreme of Kenya, namely, Atieno Odhiambo, Sam Ngure and Maxwell Miyawa helped with research. The theme of this Lecture is drawn
    [Show full text]
  • Vigilant Civil Society Enforces Implementation of National Land Commission
    CASE STUDY Nairobi, Kenya Vigilant civil society enforces PRINCIPAL ORGANISATIONS INVOLVED implementation Kenya Land Alliance (KLA), Land Sector Non State Actors (LSNSA), Ford of National Land Foundation, Kenya Private Sector Alliance LOCATION Nairobi, Kenya Commission This case illustrates how non-state actors collaborated with TIMELINE citizens to compel the Kenyan State to appoint a Land 2012 - 2013 Commission, an institution provided for by the law. The objective of a decentralised and autonomous Land TARGET AUDIENCE Commission was to improve land governance in Kenya and Civil society, policy makers, communities increase the accountability of executives. However, the Kenyan Executive was delaying the creation of this institution. KEYWORDS Diverse and complementary strategies were put in place by Governance, community, mobilisation, non-state actors and communities, which mobilised to ensure advocacy, multi-stakeholder cooperation that the Government complied with a Constitutional provision aimed at improving land governance in Kenya. GOOD PRACTICES towards making land governance more people-centred This case study is part of the ILC’s Database of Good Practices, an initiative that documents and systematises ILC members and partners’ experience in promoting people-centred land governance, as defined in the Antigua Declaration of the ILC Assembly of Members. Further information at www.landcoalition.org/what-we-do This case study supports people-centred land governance as it contributes to: Commitment 1 Respect, protect and strengthen the land rights of women and men living in poverty Commitment 7 Ensure that processes of decision-making over land are inclusive Commitment 8 Ensure transparency and accountability Case description Background issues Kenya has a history of land related conflict.
    [Show full text]
  • Supreme Court Act
    LAWS OF KENYA SUPREME COURT ACT NO. 7 OF 2011 Revised Edition 2017 [2011] Published by the National Council for Law Reporting with the Authority of the Attorney-General www.kenyalaw.org [Rev. 2017] No. 7 of 2011 Supreme Court NO. 7 OF 2011 SUPREME COURT ACT ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I – PRELIMINARY Section 1. Short title. 2. Interpretation. 3. Object of the Act. PART II – ADMINISTRATION OF THE SUPREME COURT 4. Vacancy not to affect jurisdiction. 5. Order of precedence of judges of the Supreme Court. 6. Presiding judge. 7. Procedure if judges absent. 8. Manner of arriving at decisions. 9. Registrar of the Supreme Court. 10. Functions of the Registrar. 11. Revision of decisions of the Registrar. PART III – JURISDICTION OF THE SUPREME COURT 12. Determination of disputes arising out of presidential elections. 13. Advisory role. 14. Special jurisdiction. PART IV – APPEALS TO THE SUPREME COURT 15. Appeals to be by leave. 16. Criteria for leave to appeal. 17. Direct appeals only in exceptional circumstances. 18. Reasons for refusal of leave to appeal. 19. Extent of appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. PART V – GENERAL 20. Appeals to proceed by fresh hearing. 21. General powers. 22. Power to remit proceedings. 23. Exercise of powers of the Court. 24. Interlocutory orders and directions by the Court. 25. Judgment of the Court. 26. Delivery of judgment. 27. Decisions of the Court may be enforced by the High Court. 28. Contempt of Court. 29. Seal of the Supreme Court. 30. Representation before the Supreme Court. 31. Rules. 3 [Rev. 2017] No.
    [Show full text]
  • 14Th September, 2017 TO; the Secretary Judicial Service
    14th September, 2017 TO; The Secretary Judicial Service Commission Supreme Court Building NAIROBI Dear Madam, RE: PETITION AGAINST JUSTICE DAVID MARAGA Chief Justice & President of Supreme Court A. COMPLAINTS & FACTS THEREOF 1.0 Violation of Regulation 12 of The Judicial Code of Conduct & Ethics The Chief Justice has invited, encouraged and permitted entry into the core of the Judiciary by Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) who are known protagonists of the President and Deputy President and who propagated the prosecution of the President and Deputy President at the International Criminal Court (ICC). These elements have now captured the Judiciary with the intent of procuring a regime change through judicial radicalism. The Chief Justice has, inter alia; a) Invited, facilitated and supported the embedding of technical support and financing by the International Development Law Organization (IDLO) to entities within the Judiciary including the Judicial Training Institute, National Council for Administration of Justice and Judicial Election Committee, with full knowledge that the IDLO organization is associated with the known anti-government partisan protagonists, including Makau Mutua who is a Board Member thereof; with full knowledge that the entity collaborates with local non-state actors that participated in prosecuting the President and Deputy President at the I.C.C; with full knowledge that the entity is further associated with local non-governmental organizations and individuals who petitioned against the election of the President
    [Show full text]
  • Governance Assessment Kenya 2016.Pdf
    GOVERNANCE ASSESSMENT KENYA: JANUARY 2013 – JULY 2016 Kenya: Governance Assessment GOVERNANCE ASSESSMENT Kenya: January 2013 – July 2016 Roland Ebole and Morris Odhiambo1 1 Introduction This report focuses on politically significant developments in Kenya from 2013, when the country held its first general elections under the 2010 constitution. The constitution is considered to have markedly enhanced protection of basic rights, significantly constrained executive power, and provides limited devolution of powers across 47 newly created county governments.2 In 2013, Kenya held its first general election under the 2010 constitution. Kenyans cast their votes for president, national and county-level representatives, female representatives to the National Assembly, and governors. With 50.5% of the vote, Uhuru Kenyatta of the National Alliance (TNA), backed by the Jubilee Alliance, won the presidency. His opponent, Raila Odinga of the Orange Democratic Movement (ODM), backed by the Coalition for Reforms and Democracy (CORD), was second with 43.7%. The election of governors and local assemblies strengthened the position of county governments. Female representatives to the National Assembly were elected in all 47 counties3 while 16 more were nominated to the Senate.4 Following the vote, CORD and a civil society organization (CSO) challenged the outcome of the presidential election at the Supreme Court,5 which had only 14 days to consider their petition under the constitution.6 Moreover, the pay scale for members of parliament set by the Salaries and Remuneration Commission was rejected by legislators, forcing the SRC to approve higher salaries.7 Implementation of the constitution and additional reforms continued, including the vetting of police officers by the National Police Service Commission (NPSC) and scrutiny of judges and magistrates by the Judges and Magistrates Vetting Board (JMVB).
    [Show full text]
  • IN the SUPREME COURT of KENYA at NAIROBI (Coram: Maraga, CJ & P, Mwilu, DCJ & V-P, Ojwang, Wanjala, Njoki and Lenaola, SCJJ)
    REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE SUPREME COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI (Coram: Maraga, CJ & P, Mwilu, DCJ & V-P, Ojwang, Wanjala, Njoki and Lenaola, SCJJ) PRESIDENTIAL PETITION NO. 1 OF 2017 BETWEEN 1. RAILA AMOLO ODINGA……………………….……….1ST PETITIONER 2. STEPHEN KALONZO MUSYOKA……………………2ND PETITIONER AND 1. INDEPENDENT ELECTORAL AND BOUNDARIES COMMISSION……….................1ST RESPONDENT 2. CHAIRPERSON, INDEPENDENT ELECTORAL AND BOUNDARIES COMMISSION…….……… 2ND RESPONDENT 3. H. E. UHURU MUIGAI KENYATTA.…….…….3RD RESPONDENT AND 1. DR. EKURU AUKOT……………………...…..1ST INTERESTED PARTY 2. PROF. MICHAEL WAINAINA………….…2ND INTERESTED PARTY AND 1. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL………………..……1ST AMICUS CURIAE 2. THE LAW SOCIETY OF KENYA……………..2ND AMICUS CURIAE JUDGMENT A. INTRODUCTION [1] Kenya is a Sovereign Republic and a Constitutional democracy founded on national values and principles of governance in Article 10 of her Constitution. All sovereign power in the Republic is reserved to her people but delegated to “Parliament and legislative assemblies in the County Governments; the national executive and the executive structures in the County Governments; and the Judiciary and the independent tribunals.”1 In the election of her representatives, Kenya holds general elections on the second Tuesday of August in every fifth year.2 [2] On 8th August, 2017, Kenya held her second general election under the Constitution 2010 and Kenyans from all walks of life trooped to 40,883 polling stations across the country to exercise their rights to free, fair and regular elections under Article 38(2) of the Constitution. That date is significant because it was the first time that a general election was being held pursuant to Article 101(1) of the Constitution which decrees the holding of general elections every five years on the second Tuesday of August in the fifth year.
    [Show full text]
  • Justice for Economic Crimes? Kenya's Truth Commission
    ASPJ Africa & Francophonie - 4th Quarter 2015 Justice for Economic Crimes? Kenya’s Truth Commission KIMBERLY LANEGRAN, PHD* any countries emerging from dark periods of extensive political conflict or oppression have launched truth commissions in an effort to acknowledge past violations of human rights, achieve a measure of justice for victims, and foster communal healing and reconciliation. Most commonly, such commissions are designed to shed light on injustices such as enlistment of child soldiers, Mforced disappearances, police violence, wide-scale abuse of women, assassinations, mur- der, and torture. However, in recent years, people have become more aware of the hollow- ness of transitional justice and reconciliation measures that are blind to social and eco- nomic injustices. Rama Mani, for example, suggests that transitional justice structures must consider whether and how to address war economies and corruption, in particular, if the field “is to achieve its intended goals.”1 Indeed, Dustin Sharp sees a new preoccupa- tion with considering a place for economic violence and economic justice within transi- tional justice scholarship.2 Concomitantly, a small number of truth commissions have examined and sought justice for a limited set of economic crimes and atrocities. Kenya’s Truth, Justice and Reconciliation Commission (TJRC) (2008–13) was es- tablished with an innovative mandate that explicitly included a wide range of alleged economic injustices for investigation. Many people believed that the root causes of Ke- nya’s 2008 postelection violence lay in economic crimes, particularly the misappropria- tion of land, perpetrated against Kenyans since independence. During its investigatory phase, the TJRC vigorously sought to fulfill this part of its charge, soliciting evidence of economic violations and pursuing allegations.
    [Show full text]
  • World Bank Land Conference 2019
    World Bank Land Conference 2019 Theme: Land Policy and Political Economy The Political Economy of Kenya Land Policy Review Odenda Lumumba, CEO- Kenya Land Alliance & PhD Student, Land and Agrarian Studies, University of the Western Cape Abstract The political quest to review the Kenya National Land Policy (KNLP) has been on the cards since it was formulated and endorsed by Parliament on December 3, 2009. This is despite the fact that the policy document was developed in tandem with the Framework and Guidelines on Land Policy in Africa (F&G), which spelled out a comprehensive process of restructuring three major components of the land system, namely its structure of land ownership (property system), land use and production structures, and the support services infrastructure for land delivery. The F & G was declared by the Heads of States and Governments in July 2009 as their commitment to the shared vision, objectives and principles on land policy matters. The Kenya National Land Policy whose principles are anchored in the Constitution of Kenya offers a framework of policies and laws designed to secure rights over land for sustainable growth, investments and the reduction of poverty in line with the Government’s development blue- print, Vision 2030. The KNLP was one of the most important policies introduced in Kenya due to sustained pressure from the civil society and it captured all aspects of policies and practices that required reforming. Exploring the KNLP from the political economy theoretical perspective is key because as the policy was being finalized having attracted varied donor support through wide ranging participatory process, the USAID criticized it for its overly agrarian thrust and suggested the need of effecting changes before it was endorsed by the Parliament1.
    [Show full text]
  • Alternative Justice Systems Baseline Policy, 2020
    AlternativeALTERNATIVE JUSTICE SYSTEMS FRAMEWORKJustice SystemsPOLICY Baseline Policy traditional, informal and other mechanisms used to access justice in kenya (alternative justice systems) August 2020 Copyright © Judiciary of Kenya, 2020 Published by The Judiciary of Kenya P.O. Box 30041 - 00100, Nairobi Tel. +254 20 2221221 First edition: August 2020 All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or by any information storage and retrieval system, without written permission from the author or acknowledging the source except for the inclusion of brief quotations in a review. Cover photo: Allan Gichigi/UNODC Design and layout: Amina Darani/UNODC This publication was produced with technical assistance from the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) and with the financial support of the European Union through the Programme for Legal Empowerment and Aid Delivery in Kenya (PLEAD). Its contents are the sole responsibility of the Judiciary of Kenya and do not necessarily reflect the views of the European Union or UNODC. JUSTICE AS FREEDOM1: TR ADITIONAL, INFORMAL AND OTHER MECHANISMS FOR DISPUTE RESOLUTION IN KENYA August 2020 Alternative Justice Systems Baseline Policy 1 This phrase is borrowed from Amartya Sen,Development as Freedom (Oxford University Press: Oxford, 1999). Accord- ing to Sen (at page 3), development should not be gauged solely from an economic perspective or opportunities that any project is likely to create. Rather, we need to take a transformative approach. This perspective entails reviewing also rights that any initiative promotes or curtails. Aligning AJS Mechanisms and Judiciary to the Constitution of Kenya (2010) and The Judiciary’s Blueprint for Sustaining Judicial Transformation TASK FORCE ON THE TR ADITIONAL, INFORMAL AND OTHER MECHANISMS FOR DISPUTE RESOLUTION IN KENYA Letter of transmittal Date: Friday, 17th August, 2020 Hon.
    [Show full text]
  • Hansard Report Is for Information Purposes Only
    March 11, 2021 NATIONAL ASSEMBLY DEBATES 1 PARLIAMENT OF KENYA THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY THE HANSARD Thursday, 11th March 2021 House met at 10.00 a.m. [The Deputy Speaker (Hon. Moses Cheboi) in the Chair] PRAYERS Hon. Deputy Speaker: Hon. Members, although a number of Members are walking in, we are just short of the required Quorum. So, I order that the Bell be rung for 10 minutes. (The Quorum Bell was rung) Order Members! Take your seats. We now have the required Quorum. Let us begin business. PETITION Hon. Deputy Speaker: Under this Order, we have the Member for Magarini, Hon. Michael Kingi. IRREGULAR EXTENSION OF GALANA RANCHING BOUNDARY Hon. Michael Kingi (Magarini, ODM): Hon. Deputy Speaker, I rise to present Petition No.4 of 2021 regarding irregular extension of Galana Ranching Boundary. I, the undersigned, on behalf of Magarini Sub-County Community Land Owners, draw the attention of the House to the following: THAT, the Galana Game and Ranching Community land in Kilifi and Tana River counties was indigenously settled on by the Waata and Giriama communities before colonisation of the country. THAT, in 1972, the Agricultural Development Corporation (ADC) took over Galana Game and Ranching land with its original boundary points that were marked in 1961 jointly by the Waata and Giriama communities and several colonial government representatives such as Geoffrey Pois, Martin Anderson, Henry Henly and David Teller. THAT, local representatives who witnessed this demarcation separating the ranching land from the community land included Hiribae Guyo, Bajila Bashora, Wakati Hogomthi, Fondo Mwangirani, Kitu Nguo as well as Abadiba Guyo Kiribai, James Guyo Bajila, Robert Thoya Mwamure, Soso Shako, Changawa Chanjalo and other community elders.
    [Show full text]