Court halts adoption of Mandera urban development plan

The Environment and Land Court in Garissa has blocked the implementation of Mandera County’s urban development plan.

The court barred officials from proceeding with any deliberations on the plan or implementing a report passed by the county assembly until the matter is determined.

The Mandera County Government Integrated Strategic Urban Development Plan (2015-2035) seeks to restructure Mandera town.

Madera resident Salah Maalim Alio had sued seeking to halt the disputed plan.

Several clans in Mandera East had accused members of the Mandera County Assembly of plotting to grab land and benefit a few wealthy individuals by allocating them plots from community land through the contentious plan.

Mr Alio said in his petition that the land targeted by the county government was not idle and if the plan is implemented, residents of several locations would be affected.

“The plan covers 14 locations and if implemented, it means thousands of the residents will be displaced from their ancestral homes,” he said.

Categorising of land

County officials had proposed categorising the land into different zones – commercial, educational, public, industrial, transport, conservation, agricultural and deferred.

Residential zones were to be divided into three sections – high-density, medium and low-density.

The petitioner argued that the planned zoning and the overall Mandera town planning are not meant to benefit the public but a few wealthy individuals.

The targeted land, he said, belonged to the minority ethnic group referred to as the Corner tribe.

“The right to own land and other property by members of the Corner tribe is under threat or likely to be infringed and denied should the integrated strategic plan be gazetted and implemented,” Mr Alio pleaded.

The disputed land is about 13,309 hectares, the petitioner says.

Corner tribe land

“This is the only land that belongs to the Corner tribe and displacing them from these territories and denying them (the) opportunity to register it as community land will further marginalise them, render them landless and put them in a perpetual state of poverty,” he said.

He also warned that displacing people from the land will lead to the rise of informal settlements in Mandera town and its satellite centres.

He said the land has not been alienated or adjudicated but was held in trust by the defunct Mandera municipal council on behalf of residents.

Several people, he claimed, were allocated land by the council and issued with allotment letters and certificates of ownership but the county government has ignored them.

“The County Assembly Committee on Land, Housing and Physical Planning disregarded the views of the land owners whose certificates had been cancelled and this (implies) that the committee had a premeditated agenda (by) passing the report,” he argued.

Just a formality

He said the committee, chaired by nominated MCA Halima Billow, conducted public participation only as a formality but not as a process of promoting people’s development and prosperity.

“Should the county government be allowed to implement the plan, then residents of Mandera East will have lost their community lands which should be recognised, protected and registered in their favour,” Mr Alio said.

He said halting the process will enhance, protect, promote and guarantee the rights of residents to the land, of which the county government is only a trustee.

Article 63 of the Constitution describes community land as that held, managed or used by specific communities as forests, grazing areas or shrines.

The same law says any unregistered community land should be held in trust by the county government on behalf of communities.

In his ruling, Justice Cherono said the application raised weighty constitutional issues that should be heard as a priority.

An inter partes hearing is set for February 24.