• Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Linkedin
Skip to content
Menu
REDD-Monitor
  • Start here
  • About REDD-Monitor
  • REDD: An introduction
  • Contact
REDD-Monitor

Kenya Forest Service evicts 300 Ogiek families from their homes in the Mau Forest. Despite the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights 2017 ruling that the Ogiek should not be evicted

Posted on 16 July 202016 July 2020

By Chris Lang

In May 2017, the Ogiek Indigenous People won an important land rights victory at the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights. The Court ruled that the Ogiek have the right to live in the Mau Forest and that the government of Kenya was wrong to evict them. At the end of June 2020, 100 officers from the Kenya Forest Service and Kenya Police Service started evicting the Ogiek and demolishing their homes.

On 7 July 2020, Kenya Forest Service guards evicted 300 families from the Ogiek community. According to the Star, as many as 30,000 Ogiek families could end up homeless.

The evictions are taking place despite a moratorium on forced evictions issued by the government only one month ago.

On 11 May 2020, Fred Matiangi’i, Kenya’s Cabinet Secretary, Ministry of Interior and Coordination of National Government, went on national television to announce a moratorium on forced evictions during the coronavirus evictions.

The Star comments,

Although the Environment and Land Court on Friday halted any pending evictions, the government’s record in obeying court orders offers no respite for the homeowners.

Defending the future

In May 2020, the Katiba Institute and the Ogiek Peoples Development Program put out a report titled, “Defending our future: Overcoming the challenges of returning the Ogiek home”.

Kenya’s Ministry for Environment and Forestry had set up a taskforce to advise the government on how to implement the Ogiek judgement.

In the Preface to the report Daniel Kobei, Executive Director of the Ogiek Peoples Development Program, writes,

This taskforce, like colonial rule in Kenya in times past, did not include representation of our community even though the deliberations directly concerned us. We understand its mandate ended on 24 January 2020 but its report has not been made public despite our attempts to seek disclosure. The Ogiek community made submissions to the taskforce seeking complete restitution of our ancestral land, with at least seven non-transferable community titles.

Lucy Claridge, Senior Counsel at the Forest Peoples Programme, summarises the key findings of the Ogiek judgement in the report. The Court recognised the Ogiek as an Indigenous community and that the Mau Forest is their ancestral home. For centuries the Ogiek have depended on the Mau Forest as a source of livelihood.

Article 14, of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, states that “The right to property shall be guaranteed”. The Court recognised the Ogiek’s “right to own, use, develop and control the lands, territories and resources that they possess by reason of traditional ownership or other traditional occupation or use”, as stated in the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Claridge writes that,

Importantly, the Court recognized that such rights ‘do not necessarily entail the right of ownership in its classical meaning, including the right to dispose thereof ’, recognizing that, unlike other property rights, indigenous rights over their ancestral lands are inalienable: they cannot be transferred or taken away. Since the government had not disputed that the Ogiek have occupied lands in the Mau Forest since time immemorial, the Court ruled that they have the right to occupy, use and enjoy their ancestral lands. Further, although the Court accepted that the right to property under Article 14 can be restricted in the public interest where necessary and proportionate, it found that the degradation of the Mau Forest could neither be attributable to the Ogiek nor did the preservation of the ecosystem justify their eviction. Accordingly, the expulsion of the Ogiek from their ancestral lands against their will, without prior consultation, constitutes a violation of Article 14.

Instead of respecting the ruling of the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights the Kenyan government is destroying the homes of the Ogiek Indigenous communities. It is also evicting Sengwer Indigenous communities. These evictions are taking place during the coronavirus pandemic. Making people homeless makes them more at risk from the coronavirus. And all of this is taking place in the name of conservation.

 

1 thought on “Kenya Forest Service evicts 300 Ogiek families from their homes in the Mau Forest. Despite the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights 2017 ruling that the Ogiek should not be evicted”

  1. Gil Haynes says:
    16 July 2020 at 6:21 pm

    So another minister or high official wants the land for his own use and disregards people from another tribe. Need we say more.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

SUBSCRIBE!

Enter your email address to receive notification of new posts.

Recent themes
Natural Climate Solutions
WWF's conservation scandals
Aviation and offsetting
Conservation Watch

Recent Comments

  • shahid on James Moore sentenced to more than 11 years in prison for his role in the Bar Works scam
  • Kathleen McCroskey on Offsetting is not an option if we are serious about addressing the climate crisis. My response to Hartmut Graßl
  • Delton Chen on Offsetting is not an option if we are serious about addressing the climate crisis. My response to Hartmut Graßl
  • Kathleen McCroskey on Offsetting is not an option if we are serious about addressing the climate crisis. My response to Hartmut Graßl
  • Chris Lang on Offsetting is not an option if we are serious about addressing the climate crisis. My response to Hartmut Graßl

Recent Posts

  • Offsetting is not an option if we are serious about addressing the climate crisis. My response to Hartmut Graßl
  • Papua New Guinea Environmental Alliance letter to Pogio Ghate, Minister for Environment, Conservation and Climate Change
  • Ecomapuá Amazon REDD Project, Brazil: Pública investigation reveals Ecomapuá Conservação is selling “illegal” carbon offsets from land it does not own, without transferring the money to local communities
  • Response from Steve Zwick, Verra: “Verra will ask Kanaka Management Systems to cease and desist any actions that may mislead communities into thinking that Verra has not already rejected the project”
  • Response from Kanaka Management Services: “Please do not conduct legal trail or castigate REDD+ project developers on the website by writing text which shows the project developer in bad light”

Recent Comments

  • shahid on James Moore sentenced to more than 11 years in prison for his role in the Bar Works scam
  • Kathleen McCroskey on Offsetting is not an option if we are serious about addressing the climate crisis. My response to Hartmut Graßl
  • Delton Chen on Offsetting is not an option if we are serious about addressing the climate crisis. My response to Hartmut Graßl
  • Kathleen McCroskey on Offsetting is not an option if we are serious about addressing the climate crisis. My response to Hartmut Graßl
  • Chris Lang on Offsetting is not an option if we are serious about addressing the climate crisis. My response to Hartmut Graßl

Issues and Organisations

30x30 AB 32 Andes Amazon Boiler rooms California Can REDD save ... ? Carbon accounting Carbon Credits Carbon Offsets CDM Conservation-Watch Conservation International COP21 Paris Deforestation FCPF FERN Financing REDD Forest definition Fossil fuels FPP Friends of the Earth FSC Green Climate Fund Greenpeace Guest post ICAO Illegal logging Indigenous Peoples Natural Climate Solutions NGO statements Plantations Poznan R-M interview REDD and rights REDD in the news Risk RSPO-Watch Safeguards Sengwer The Nature Conservancy UN-REDD UNFCCC World Bank WRM WWF

Countries

Australia Bolivia Brazil Cambodia Cameroon Canada China Colombia Congo Basin region Costa Rica DR Congo Ecuador El Salvador European Union France Germany Guatemala Guyana Honduras India Indonesia Kenya Laos Madagascar Malaysia Mexico Nicaragua Norway Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Republic of Congo Sierra Leone Sweden Tanzania Thailand Uganda UK Uncategorized United Arab Emirates USA Vietnam West Papua
©2022 REDD-Monitor | Powered by WordPress and Superb Themes!