Co-petitioners in an environmental case seeking to halt developments within Nairobi National Park have accused the Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS) of failing to comply fully with a court-ordered site inspection by allegedly restricting their participation.
The petition, filed by more than 4,600 Kenyans, seeks to stop what the petitioners describe as continued destruction of Nairobi National Park through government-backed development projects. The matter is scheduled for hearing before the Environment and Land Court on July 23.
In orders issued on July 15, the court directed that the Deputy Registrar of the Environment and Land Court visit the park in the presence of all parties and prepare a report before the hearing proceeds.
However, the co-petitioners claimed they were denied access to the park despite arriving at the appointed time for the inspection.
In a statement, the group alleged that they were only allowed into the park after the inspection had already been completed by court officials, representatives from the Kenya Wildlife Service, members of the media and the petitioners’ legal representative.
They argued that the exclusion defeated the purpose of the court-directed exercise, which was intended to enable all parties to participate in the inspection and provide information that would assist the court in determining the matter.
The petitioners further alleged that they were intimidated by armed and masked KWS personnel during the exercise and claimed that some officers later attempted to eject them from the agency’s headquarters.
The group also questioned KWS’s decision to allow members of the media to witness the inspection while allegedly denying the co-petitioners access.
“What possible sense does it make to block the co-petitioners from being part of the site visit, yet openly invite the media to be part of the same?” the petitioners said in the statement.
They alleged that the move appeared intended to control public perception while denying them an opportunity to present their concerns during the inspection.
The petitioners further claimed that the incident reflected a lack of transparency and undermined the principles of public participation and accountability in matters affecting public resources.
Describing the exercise as a public relations event rather than a court-supervised inspection, they urged the Judiciary to ensure court directives are implemented fully and fairly.
“We call on the courts to reaffirm their commitment to the rule of law and ensure court orders are respected in their entirety. We further urge the courts to ensure citizens are able to fully exercise their rights to hold government institutions to account,” the statement said.
The Environment and Land Court is expected to hear the petition on July 23 after considering the Deputy Registrar’s inspection report.
By Sallo Gobana
