The High Court has stopped Kenya Railways Corporation from evicting residents of Muthurwa estate, ruling that the agency cannot proceed until it complies with court-ordered safeguards designed to protect the rights of those facing displacement.
In a judgment that reinforces constitutional protections against forced evictions, Justice Lawrence Mugambi said Kenya Railways remains the legal owner of the land. However, ownership alone does not permit an eviction that ignores conditions laid down by the court more than a decade ago.
The ruling stems from a long-running dispute over the railway reserve, where residents were removed in July 2010. In a landmark decision delivered on 26 August 2013, the High Court found that the manner of those evictions violated the residents’ constitutional right to accessible and adequate housing under Article 43 of the Constitution.
That earlier judgment required the State to put in place clear legal and policy measures governing evictions and demolitions. It also directed the government to explain the steps taken to uphold the constitutional rights to adequate housing and reasonable sanitation.
Beyond that, the court ordered Kenya Railways and the affected residents to jointly develop an eviction plan that would meet both constitutional and international human rights standards.
Those safeguards included ensuring government officials were present during any eviction, protecting the dignity and security of residents, avoiding night-time evictions, and ensuring families were not removed during school examinations, holidays or severe weather.
Justice Mugambi said there was no evidence before the court showing that those directives had been fully implemented.
“No such evidence was exhibited… notwithstanding that it is now 13 years since the order was issued,” the judge said.
He added that Kenya Railways could not seek to enforce only the section of the 2013 judgment requiring residents to vacate while overlooking the obligations imposed on the State.
“Prior to the petitioners’ eviction being ordered, an integrated order that includes all the components comprised in the order issued 13 years ago must be complied with,” Justice Mugambi ruled.
The judge further stated that selective enforcement of the earlier decision could not be allowed.
“Partial or selective implementation of certain components alone or leaving out others is impermissible and cannot be sanctioned by this Honourable Court.”
The court dismissed Kenya Railways’ application, effectively suspending the planned eviction until the outstanding directives are fulfilled.
The ruling leaves ownership of the land unchanged but makes clear that any future eviction must follow constitutional procedures and respect the rights of those affected. It also serves as a reminder that court orders on housing rights remain binding, even years after they are issued.
About the Author
