Court blocks bid to withdraw petition against Maasai Mara luxury camp
Meitamei Ololdapash, who is vying for the Narok Senate seat briefs the media on May, 9, 2022
The Environment and Land Court has blocked an attempt to withdraw a petition challenging the operations of a luxury safari camp in the Maasai Mara along the Kenya-Tanzania border, ruling that the case has evolved into a matter of public interest.
In its decision, the court emphasized that it could not permit the withdrawal without first ensuring that doing so would not harm the public interest, given the gravity of the issues raised.
“The petition raises national and international interest. Before allowing the withdrawal of such a public interest matter, the court must be satisfied that there will be no prejudice to any of the parties or to the public,” the court stated.
The petition was filed in August 2025 by conservation activist Joel Meitamei Ole Dapash, seeking to halt operations of the Ritz-Carlton Maasai Mara safari camp. The petition alleged that the development obstructs wildlife migratory corridors and poses a threat to biodiversity.
It further claimed that the camp was unlawfully constructed and risks damaging the Maasai Mara ecosystem. Operated by Lazizi Mara Limited under the Marriott International luxury brand, the camp charges guests up to $3,675 (Sh476,647) per night, ranking among Kenya’s most expensive safari destinations.
Earlier this week, Ole Dapash sought to withdraw the case, informing the court that discussions among stakeholders had resolved the concerns he raised on behalf of the Maasai community and environmental conservationists.
However, Lazizi Mara opposed the withdrawal, arguing that abandoning the case would leave damaging allegations unresolved after months of intense public scrutiny.
“The matter has been widely publicized, and my client has been vilified nationally and internationally,” said Senior Counsel Kiragu Kimani, representing Lazizi Mara. He contended that withdrawing the case without a hearing would deny the company an opportunity to clear its name.
Chama Cha Mashinani National Organising Secretary, Mr Meitamei ole Dapash, reading the party resolutions at Milele Resort Hotel in Nakuru Town on Friday, April 7, 2017.
Justice Lucy Gacheru agreed that the circumstances raised serious questions about fairness and good faith.
“How have the concerns in the petition been satisfied?” she questioned in her ruling. “The court must also be satisfied that there is no abuse of the court process.”
The judge noted that although the petition was filed in August, some respondents were not formally served and only learned of the case through social media reports.
“This raises the question of whether the petitioner intended to prosecute the petition to its logical conclusion or merely to air allegations through public platforms,” she remarked.
Justice Gacheru ruled that the case involves “grave concerns regarding the obstruction of the migratory corridor for wildebeests and other wildlife within the Maasai Mara,” making it a public interest litigation that cannot be casually withdrawn.
“This court will not allow its withdrawal as per the notice dated December 16, 2025,” she declared, stressing that the decision was based on multiple concerns arising from the case’s handling.
Given the sustained public debate surrounding the dispute, the judge directed that the petition proceed to a full hearing to be determined on its merits. The trial will now continue without the activist’s participation.
Additionally, the court permitted the Law Society of Kenya (LSK) and the East African Wildlife Society (EAWS) to join the proceedings as interested parties, citing the case’s broader public significance.
The court also addressed pending applications, including requests for conservatory orders and the empanelment of an uneven number of judges. These applications will be heard expeditiously through written submissions, with the court expected to issue filing timelines soon.
Justice Gacheru urged Lazizi Mara to drop its separate contempt of court application and focus on the substantive issues.
“Given that the matter is already in the public domain, the third respondent should abandon the contempt application and concentrate on the main suit,” she advised.
The dispute has drawn significant attention due to its implications for wildlife conservation, community rights, and Kenya’s luxury tourism sector.
Lazizi Mara maintains that it secured all necessary approvals from regulators, including the National Environment Management Authority (NEMA), Narok County Government, and the Water Resources Authority (WRA).
The company insists the camp is situated on leased county land, not within the Maasai Mara National Reserve.
The firm has argued that the case threatens jobs, community revenues, and investor confidence in Kenya’s tourism industry.
The case is scheduled for mention on February 10, 2025.
