Plans to hive off Karura Forest land for road expansion come under sharp scrutiny
A picnic site inside Karura Forest.
What you need to know:
- Ms Mbula pointed out that illegal harvesting of trees had already begun contrary to forests regulations.
- Green Belt Movement said the decisions threaten the very existence of the Karura Forest ecosystem.
A Kenyan has written to Kenya Forest Service (KFS) and the Kenya National Highways Authority (KeNHA) demanding information on plans to hive-off 51.6 acres of Karura Forest for the expansion of Kiambu Road.
In her letter to the two agencies and copied to Environment Cabinet Secretary Aden Duale, Ms Esther Mbula is demanding documents relating to the issuance of special-use licence granted before the exercise started.
Through the law firm of James Oketch & Company Advocates, Ms Mbula says it was clear that the wayleave application was granted before public views were considered.
“Take notice that if we do not hear from you in regard to this demand within seven days of receipt of this letter, we have peremptory instructions to institute legal proceedings against you at your own peril as to all attendant costs, the undersigned’s legal costs and consequences without further notice or reference to you,” the letter reads in part.
Other than copies of licence issued by KSF and KeNHA, Ms Mbula is also demanding copies of documents and information on the date and time in relation to the prequalification procedure for persons harvesting timber.
Ms Mbula pointed out that illegal harvesting of trees had already begun contrary to forests regulations.
She says the agencies were endangering the delicate balance of nature, promoting deforestation and threatening the livelihood of communities that rely on forests for their sustenance.
“Your actions infringe on our client’s right to clean and healthy environment under Article 42 of the Constitution and our client has the right to have the same protected for the benefit of the present and future generations through legislative and other measures specified in Article 69 of the Constitution and to have such obligations fulfilled under Article 70 of the constitution,” the letter adds.
Last week, Green Belt Movement (GBM) moved to court to challenge the plans to hive off 51.6 acre parcel of the forest to expand the road linking Kiambu town and the capital Nairobi.
The road will be dualled at a cost of Sh38 billion, according to the lobby in a contract awarded to Sinohydro Corporation Limited.
The lobby argued that the plans to expand the road were made without obtaining the environment impact assessment licence.
“The respondents’ decision to proceed with the road construction, granting of approvals for the recreational facility and the ablution block without obtaining the requisite licence, is deeply misguided and detrimental move that puts short-term economic gain of a small minority ahead of the long-term well-being of the nation's environment and future generations,” the lobby group said in the petition.
GBM said the decisions threaten the very existence of the Karura Forest ecosystem and the allocations have been done contrary to the law.
The movement argued that the construction of such a facility would not only cause a habitat disturbance of wildlife but also the stress associated with the construction could eventually lead to the displacement of species which have the very premise as their natural habitat.
Additionally, during the construction of the recreational facility and after, GBM “is apprehensive that the human traffic could lead to unmeasured and unmitigated pollution caused by the increased human traffic, affecting the cleanliness and the health of the environment as envisioned in the Constitution.”
The lobby said in court documents that the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for the proposed project was undertaken simultaneously with the feasibility study before project implementation.
“Kenya Forest Service (KFS) indicates that the construction of Kiambu dual carriage road follows a wayleave that was granted in 1951. They fail to provide a copy of the said wayleave, particularly one that itemises that the 51.64Ha that they have granted a licence to Kenha was as conferred in the wayleave,” read the court documents.
“The Petitioner contends that even where this was to be the case, the current boundary lines as currently drawn would never have been, as they would have clearly outlined prior to installation of the fence.”
