Squatters involved in a legal battle with the family of former Kitui governor Charity Ngilu over the ownership of prime property in Mombasa have asked the court to consider their plight should it find the documents in the politician’s possession genuine.
Testifying before the Environment and Land Court, Mr Omar Kai pleaded with the judge, Mr Lucas Naikuni, saying that he and other squatters have considered the property their home since 1970.
“I am unsure if there is a title to the property, and if there is, then the court should investigate how it was acquired. If the title documents that the plaintiff possesses are authentic, then I urge this court to assist us in finding an alternative place to relocate. We are Kenyans and deserve a place to call home," stated Mr Kai.
Guided by lawyer Hamisi Salim, Mr Kai denied signing any documents, receiving money from anyone, or engaging in any transactions related to the property in question.
Court records indicate that the former Cabinet minister initiated the lawsuit in 2022 together with Lunde Jemi Mwendwa, Mwende Kathetia, and Syalo Ngilu Mwendwa. The four are acting as the personal representatives of the late Michael Mwendwa Ngilu's estate.
The squatters have denied claims that the property belongs to the Ngilus or that they are beneficiaries of the land.
“We believe that the title documents obtained for this property were acquired through fraud and or misrepresentation, making them null and void,” they stated.
The defendants argue that the land records indicate that the property was initially charged to an individual, but the transfer to another person shows that the registration was done through a government purchase after the original owner failed to pay government rent, which they argue is contradictory.
“The original grant to the initial owner has not been disclosed to reveal the nature of the grant and its conditions,” they stated in their legal filings.
Some of the squatters claim to have resided on the property for over 20 years, while others argue that they built structures on it after being welcomed more than 10 years ago.
“We have a fundamental right to shelter, and unless the State provides us with alternative land, we should not be evicted from the property. In fact, both the national and county governments have a constitutional obligation to acquire the said property for us,” they emphasised.
The squatters claim they have never seen any member of the Ngilu family on the land since they occupied it, arguing that their claim to possession is false.
They also state that their occupation of the land is known to the County Government of Mombasa, which has assured them of allocation of the land or providing an alternative.
The former Kitui governor had told the court that she assumed the property's ownership as the personal representative of her late husband's estate.
"We have always peacefully and exclusively occupied the property after obtaining the necessary documents," she stated.
Ms Ngilu presented a copy of the Confirmation of Grant issued by the court in the 2012 Succession Cause to support her case.
Court records indicate that the property, Subdivision Number 2427 (Original Number 2402/5) Section VI Mainland North, belongs to Michael Mwendwa Ngilu but has been invaded by individuals who have built houses on it.
The politician went to court last year upon learning about an invasion on the property by unidentified individuals.
According to Ms Ngilu, a whistleblower informed her of the invasion in 2020, reporting that unknown individuals had trespassed and were trying to erect structures on the land.
However, the court was informed that the trespassers agreed to leave the property but under the condition of being compensated.
She lamented to the court that the defendants persist in unlawfully occupying the property, hindering any development or benefits from it.
MsNgilu informed the court that several efforts to have the defendants vacate the premises have been met with opposition, harassment, and violence.
In October 2022, the court issued interim orders stating that no further construction should take place on the premises.
The same orders were reiterated in December of last year after the court was informed that the defendants were still engaging in unlawful construction despite the court's orders.
The plaintiffs filed the lawsuit after their unsuccessful attempts to have the defendants vacate the property.
The court has issued an injunction to prevent any further trespassing or construction on the property until the case is resolved.
