Oguku & 2 others v Speaker of the County Assembly, Kisii County & 3 others (Environment & Land Petition E002 of 2023) [2025] KEELC 1053 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court ruled that public participation doesn't require everyone to agree, just a genuine chance to be heard, dismissing residents' challenge to Kisii ward offices.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether public participation was adequate in deciding the location of the Boikanga Ward Offices
Public participation was sufficient: the 2014 public forum, the community-chosen Task Force, the 2019 consultative meetings with the Nyakembene Market Committee, and the 10 November 2022 participation exercise satisfied the test.
The court applied the test that a reasonable opportunity to be heard suffices; unanimity is not required. The residents in 2014 resolved to form a Task Force to identify land; when Ichuni land was unavailable, the Task Force recommended Nyakembene with the Market Committee's concurrence. The decision flowed from a body the public itself created and was not whimsical or capricious.
Whether the decision on the location of the offices was unreasonable
The decision was reasonable; the petitioners failed to demonstrate any suitable alternative land, as their annexed minutes did not resolve on South Mugirango/Bikanga/239 and no search or Green Card established ownership or availability.
The petitioners relied on minutes they claimed showed unanimous agreement to locate the offices on a 10-acre parcel, but the minutes contained no such resolution, and ownership/availability of the land was not proved. In contrast, the Nyakembene site was public land carved out by the Market Committee. The court therefore found no basis to fault the respondents' decision.
Whether locating the offices on market-centre land offends Section 79 of the Public Finance Management Act
No violation; building on public land given free by the Market Committee saves public money and is prudent management of public resources.
Section 79 requires public officers to use resources lawfully, effectively, efficiently, economically and transparently. The court noted the decision was motivated by lack of funds to purchase alternative land and the availability of public land, which conserves public funds rather than wasting them.
Legal principles established
#- The yardstick for public participation is that a reasonable opportunity is given to members of the public and interested parties to know about the issue and have an adequate say; unanimity or adoption of particular views is not required.
- Where all views were taken into account and the final decision is reasonable, the court will not interfere with the decision merely because some stakeholders disagree.
Court orders
#- 1.The petition is dismissed
- 2.The order of injunction previously issued is lifted with the dismissal of the case
- 3.No orders as to costs, since the petition was brought in public interest
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Articles 22 and 23 of the Constitution (enforcement of the Bill of Rights), invoked by the petitioners under Article 22 and 35
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Oguku & 2 others v Speaker of the County Assembly, Kisii County & 3 others (Environment & Land Petition E002 of 2023) [2025] KEELC 1053 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Petition filed 12 July 2023 (number not stated in judgment). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/1053/eng@2025-03-06
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.