Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCDismissedPetition dated 9th October 2018 (number not stated in judgment)· [2019] KEELC 3104 (KLR)

Ibrahim Mohamud Ibrahim & another v Kenya Wildlife Service & 4 others [2019] KEELC 3104 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
9 May 2019
2,423 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~10 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Environment and Land Court confirmed it can directly hear disputes about settlement and development inside Malka Mari National Park, without communities first going through county channels.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The petitioners filed a petition and a contemporaneous Notice of Motion on 9th October 2018 seeking conservatory and substantive orders concerning Malka Mari National Park, an 876 square kilometre park along the Daua River on the Kenya-Ethiopia border gazetted in 1989. They complained that the 4th respondent presented a 2018/2019 budget for infrastructure development within the park without public participation, Environmental Impact Assessment approval or National Land Commission involvement, and that the respondents failed to manage, conserve and protect the park's ecosystem, leading to invasion and settlement by communities, including construction of schools, dispensaries and roads. They sought a permanent injunction, a declaration that settlement in the park is illegal and unconstitutional, an order for eviction and relocation of the settling communities, and an order compelling the respondents to provide security and conserve the park. The 4th respondent filed a preliminary objection contending that the petition was premature and that the court lacked original jurisdiction because Section 117 of the Wildlife Conservation and Management Act requires wildlife disputes to be referred first to devolved structures, then to the National Environment Tribunal, with the ELC's jurisdiction being appellate only; it further alleged constitutional avoidance and want of precision. The court, applying the Owners of Motor Vessel 'Lillian S' and Samuel Kamau Macharia jurisdictional principles, held that the petition concerns land administration and management and eviction from land, squarely within the ELC's original jurisdiction under Article 162(2)(b) and Section 13 of the Environment and Land Court Act. The preliminary objection was dismissed with costs to be in the cause.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether Section 117 of the Wildlife Conservation and Management Act ousts this Court's original jurisdiction over the petition

Holding

It does not; the petition concerns land administration and management and eviction from a gazetted national park, matters within the ELC's jurisdiction under Section 13 of the ELC Act

Reasoning

The court construed Section 117, which channels wildlife disputes first to devolved structures and then to the National Environment Tribunal, with appeal to the ELC. It held that on the pleadings and prayers sought - injunction, declaration of illegality of settlement, eviction and conservation orders - the petition relates to land administration and management, squarely within the ELC's jurisdiction under Article 162(2)(b) and Section 13 of the ELC Act.

p. 4
02

Whether the petition is premature and violates constitutional avoidance

Holding

The preliminary objection on prematurity and constitutional avoidance failed

Reasoning

The 4th respondent argued that under Section 117 the petitioners should first have referred the dispute to the Mandera County Government and, failing resolution, to the National Environment Tribunal, citing the constitutional avoidance principle. The court, after considering the jurisdictional scope of the ELC, concluded that the issues for determination fall within its jurisdiction and dismissed the objection without requiring the petitioners to exhaust the statutory dispute-resolution mechanism.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • A question of jurisdiction must be raised and decided at the earliest opportunity; without jurisdiction a court cannot take any further step
  • A court's jurisdiction flows from the Constitution or legislation and cannot be expanded through judicial craft or innovation
  • The Environment and Land Court has original and appellate jurisdiction over all disputes relating to environment and land, including land administration and management

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The 4th respondent's Notice of Preliminary Objection dated 5th March 2019 is dismissed
  2. 2.Costs of the preliminary objection to be in the cause

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Wildlife Conservation and Management ActSection 117
  • Wildlife (Conservation and Management) Act Cap 376Section 6(1)
  • Environment and Land Court ActSection 13
  • Constitution of Kenya 2010Articles 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 42, 50, 60, 66, 159, 162(2)(b), 165
  • Devolution of Government Actnot specified

Cases cited (11)

  • Communication Commission of Kenya & 5 Others vs Royal Media Services & 5 Others
    [2014] eKLR
  • Mumo Matemu vs Trusted Society of Human Rights Alliance & 5 Others
    [2013] eKLR
  • Owners of the Motor Vessel ‘Lillian S’ vs Caltex Oil (Kenya) Ltd
    [1986-1989] EA 305; (1989) KLR 1
  • Samuel Kamau Macharia & Another vs Kenya Commercial Bank Limited & 2 Others
    [2012] eKLR; Civil Appeal No. 2 of 2011
  • Speaker of the National Assembly vs Karume
    [1990-1994] EA 549
  • Narok County Council vs Trans Mara County Council
    (2000) 1 EA 161
  • International Center for Policy and Conflict and Others vs Attorney General & Others
    [2013] eKLR
  • Gabriel Mutava & 2 Others vs Managing Director Kenya Ports Authority and Another
    [2016] eKLR
  • Annarita Karimi Njeri vs Republic
    [1976-1980] KLR 1272
  • Karisa Chengo & 2 Others vs Republic
    Criminal Appeal Nos. 44, 45 and 76 of 2014 (2015) eKLR
  • Republic vs National Environment Tribunal & 2 Others Ex-Parte Athi River Services Board
    [2015] eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Article 162(2)(b) of the Constitution and Section 13 of the Environment and Land Court Act, 2011

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Ibrahim Mohamud Ibrahim & another v Kenya Wildlife Service & 4 others [2019] KEELC 3104 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). Petition dated 9th October 2018 (number not stated in judgment). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2019/3104/eng@2019-05-09

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.