Land politics come before Kenya’s courts again

Posted on January 23, 2017 by Ambreena Manji & Jill Ghai

Since the new 2012 land laws were passed, Kenya’s Lands Ministry and
National Land Commission have tussled for power.

Ambiguities in Kenya’s 2012 land laws have led to various problems. Credit:
Samneang Lina Sin.A High

Court decision regarding land deeds caused a flurry of panic in Kenya when
it was announced on 19 December. The media reported Judge Joseph Onguto’s
“shock ruling” in dramatic terms, claiming:  “The High Court has declared
that over three million land title deeds issued by the Jubilee
administration since 2013 were irregularly processed and therefore illegal”.

This understandably caused widespread alarm, but it was somewhat
misleading. What the judge actually did was to rule that various forms
issued by the Ministry of Lands to process new land transactions were
invalid and unconstitutional. He stated clearly that the ruling did not
operate retroactively.The judgement was nonetheless deeply significant. It
was based on the fact that the Lands Minister had failed on three counts
when issuing the land title deeds by: not taking into account the advice of
the National Land Commission; not having public participation; and not
getting parliamentary scrutiny and approval.

Alert to the impact of the ruling on the value of the affected land, the
judge suspended the declaration of invalidity for one year to allow the
Ministry to address the situation and “avoid throwing the entire system of
registration of title into disarray and chaos”.

The government responded immediately, setting up a task force to report in
two months and making clear they intend to meet Judge Onguto’s deadline,
but this may prove harder than it seems.

Ambiguities in the 2012 land laws

This High Court judgement raises a number of important constitutional
issues and should be read together with the Advisory Opinion on land handed
down by the Supreme Court in 2015. Both of these interventions had to be
made to clarify ambiguities in the new laws passed in 2012 – the Land Act,
the Land Registration Act and the National Land Commission Act – which have
led to several problems.

These new land laws were required by the 2010 Constitution of Kenya which
provides that Parliament would revise, consolidate, and rationalise
existing land laws. However, the process of developing these new laws was
far from adequate. The laws were passed in haste and with minimal
consultation with experts or the public.

One important outcome of this imperfect process was that the National Land
Commission Act 2012 failed to elaborate the role of this new independent
commission, whose establishment was intended to remove centralised control
from a corrupt and dysfunctional Ministry of Lands.

When we spoke before the parliamentary Select Committee on Land and Natural
Resources in January and February 2012, we emphasised that the legislation
was poorly drafted and did not specify the duties of land administration
with sufficient clarity. We pointed out that vague provisions requiring the
two bodies to work in consultation and cooperation were inadequate.

Indeed, since 2012, the two bodies have tussled for authority. Without
clear parameters regarding their respective roles, the Ministry of Land has
fought back hard against any loss of its powers, starving the independent
National Land Commission of funds and staff, and seeking to control the
exercise of its powers in newly-devolved counties.

As a result, Kenya’s new land laws have led to less rather than more
clarity. This has made it necessary to rely on the courts for guidance. The
2015 Advisory Opinion came about because the Supreme Court was asked to
mediate on the relationship and responsibilities of the new National Land
Commission in relation to the Lands Ministry.

A similar lack of clarity relates to the issue of what amounts to adequate
“public participation” in law making. The High Court criticised the Land
Ministry  for failing to ensure such participation. However, the courts
themselves have so far been reluctant to fill in details of what public
participation entails, a notable exception being the Supreme Court’s
Advisory Opinion.  In general, even where courts have deemed public
engagement to have been insufficient,  they have not elaborated on what
would be needed to fulfil that constitutional duty.

And typically, if any effort at all to promote participation can be
evidenced before them, the judiciary has been reluctant to deem it
inadequate.Learning to live togetherAll this suggests that even though the
High Court has granted the government a year to consult with the public,
seek the input of the National Land Commission, and get parliamentary
approval in order to ensure the new land titles are valid, it is still not
at all clear what is actually needed to be done in practice to fulfil these
requirements.

Obtaining parliament’s approval should be relatively straightforward,
especially since Judge Oguto observed that the forms used did not seem to
be objectionable.  But how the public should participate is unspecified,
and participation exercises are often tokenistic. Moreover, while the court
has left it to the Land Ministry and National Land Commission to respond to
the ruling in a meaningful way, the longstanding wrangles for power between
the two bodies do not suggest they will find it easy to work together.

The critical issue remains whether these two bodies can resolve their
differences now that questions of land politics and land administration
have been aired in the Kenyan courts twice in as many years.

Ambreena Manji is Professor of Land Law and Development at Cardiff Law
School, UK.

Jill Ghai is co-founder of the Katiba Institute, Nairobi.

-- 
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/d/forum/southsudankob
View this message at 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/southsudankob/topic-id/message-id
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"South Sudan Info - The Kob" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/SouthSudanKob.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/SouthSudanKob/CAJb14oq7VHhALZpiHMddV08DbxK3AOC4qkhmm9tWw5KmkqXzhg%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to