Lobby sues road agencies over plans to demolish houses
The Mombasa Law Courts.
A human rights lobby group has sued three road agencies, accusing them of violating the rights of people set to be evicted to pave the way for expanding the Mombasa-Kwale highway.
Human Rights Agenda (Huria), which has sued the Kenya National Highways Authority (Kenha), Kenya Urban Roads Authority (Kura), Kenya Roads Board, among others, says those affected by the project are guaranteed the right to fair administrative action before a decision affecting their property is made.
The petitioner says the agencies violated the Constitution by surveying and marking buildings along the road connecting Pungu, Ng’ombeni, Denyenye, Waa and Tiwi in Kwale County for demolition without giving owners a hearing.
“Furthermore, having failed to involve the National Land Commission in the process of acquiring land for purposes of the road expansion, the entire project and intended demolitions of the roadside buildings (are) therefore unlawful,” the petitioner argues.
Through Mutisya Mwanzia and Ondeng advocates, the petitioner says the respondents have not given the affected persons any notice of the intended demolitions and that they do not intend to compensate them.
“The respondents have not engaged the affected persons to determine whether they have alternative place to reside after their houses have been demolished,” argues Huria, which has sued on behalf of more than 250 households.
The petitioner wants a declaration that the road agencies have violated the Constitution as they decided to demolish houses without involving other government agencies and the affected owners.
The lobby also wants a declaration that the road agencies cannot lawfully or compulsorily acquire the land without adequately compensating residents.
The petitioner also argues that the agencies will expose the victims to economic hardships by eliminating their sources of income.
In her supporting affidavit, Ms Halima Said, the chairperson of the affected households, says the agencies have not engaged the affected families to determine whether they have alternative places to reside after their houses are demolished.
“There is a threat of violation of the rights of the roadside residents by the respondents,” said Ms Said.
The petitioner also wants a conservatory order to restrain the agencies from interfering with the properties until they comply with the law.
The court is expected to issue directions on November 25.
