Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCAllowedPetition dated February 14, 2025· [2026] KEELC 432 (KLR)

Endorois Welfare Council v Cabinet Secretary Ministry of Environment, Climate Change and Forestry & 4 others (Environment and Land Petition E01 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 432 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
4 February 2026
6,682 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~27 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Environment and Land Court has cancelled the gazettement of Mukutani Forest, protecting Endorois community land in Baringo from conversion without proper consultation.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The petitioner, a community-based organization for the Endorois community, challenged the gazettement of approximately 13,195.8 hectares in Arabal Location (Mukutani Hills and Lemaitai Hills blocks) as Mukutani Forest under Gazette Notice No 1470 of 2016, contending the land was unregistered Endorois community land converted without public participation, consultation with the National Land Commission (NLC), or the procedures of the Community Land Act. The respondents, including the Kenya Forest Service, maintained the gazettement was a community-driven initiative by the Ilchamus community, that due process and surveys were followed, and that NLC consultation was not mandatory. The court canvassed six issues and held: (1) the suit land was community land, which was not in dispute; (2) the prescribed conversion procedures under section 22 of the Community Land Act and regulation 19 of the 2017 Regulations were not followed, and the objections of the NLC, Baringo County Government, seven MPs and over 400 residents were ignored; (3) consultation with the NLC was mandatory under section 31(2) of the Forest Conservation and Management Act; (4) there was no meaningful public participation - the minutes showed only Ilchamus leaders, with no notices, dates or venues, and the respondents bore the unmet burden of proving compliance. The court declared Arabal Location community land held in trust by the County Government of Baringo, declared the gazettement unconstitutional, null and void ab initio, issued certiorari quashing Gazette Notice No 1470, granted a permanent injunction against eviction or interference, awarded costs to the petitioner, and left the parties free to convert the land lawfully with genuine participation.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the suit land was community land

Holding

The land was community land within article 63; it was not in dispute and the respondents' own account of a community-driven process confirmed the community's stake

Reasoning

The court found it was not disputed that the land was community land. The respondents admitted the conversion process was community-led by the Ilchamus, which presupposed a community stake. The Endorois had historically occupied and used the land for grazing, settlement and cultural practices, falling squarely within article 63's definition of community land vesting in communities identified on the basis of ethnicity, culture or community of interest.

p. 14
02

Whether due process and NLC consultation preceded the gazettement

Holding

Due process was not followed; the prescribed conversion procedures under section 22 of the Community Land Act and regulation 19 were ignored, and the NLC's conditions and objections were disregarded

Reasoning

Conversion of community land to public land may occur via compulsory acquisition, transfer or surrender. The respondents claimed surrender, so regulation 19's procedures (two-thirds community assembly resolution, development plan, county approval, NLC publication) had to be met. None were proved. The NLC, the County Government and seven MPs objected, yet the gazettement proceeded. The court branded this impunity and a breach of constitutional and statutory imperatives.

p. 4
03

Whether there was meaningful public participation

Holding

There was no meaningful public participation; the alleged meetings were neither inclusive nor verifiable, and the burden of proving participation was on the respondents

Reasoning

Applying the BAT and Gakuru principles, participation must be real, purposive, inclusive and accompanied by reasonable notice. The minutes listed only Ilchamus community leaders, with no notices, dates or venues; attendance lists raised credibility doubts. Objections by over 400 residents and the county government were ignored. The respondents, bearing the onus, failed to prove compliance, so the gazettement failed the constitutional threshold of article 10(2)(a) and 69(1)(d).

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • Conversion of community land to public land must strictly follow the procedures in section 22 of the Community Land Act and section 19 of the Community Land Act Regulations, 2017; failure vitiates the process
  • Public participation in the conversion of community land must be real, meaningful and inclusive, and the party required to comply bears the burden of proving it
  • Consultation with the National Land Commission is mandatory before declaring community land a public forest under section 31(2) of the Forest Conservation and Management Act

Court orders

#
  1. 1.A declaration that Arabal Location is community land within the meaning of article 63 of the Constitution, and that the County Government of Baringo holds it in trust for the community until registration is completed under the Community Land Act
  2. 2.A declaration that consultation with the National Land Commission was mandatory before the declaration of Mukutani Forest as a public forest pursuant to section 31(2) of the Forest Conservation and Management Act, 2016
  3. 3.A declaration that the gazettment of Arabal Location as a forest under Gazette Notice No 1470 of March 3, 2016 was unconstitutional, unlawful, null and void ab initio
  4. 4.A declaration that any dealings with or decisions concerning Arabal Location community land rights can only be undertaken in consultation and with participation of the Endorois Community in compliance with articles 10, 63 and 232 of the Constitution
  5. 5.An order of certiorari to quash Gazette Notice No 1470 of March 3, 2016
  6. 6.A permanent injunction restraining the respondents, their agents or persons acting under their instructions from evicting, displacing, or interfering with the petitioners' use, occupation and enjoyment of the community land within Arabal Location
  7. 7.Costs of the petition to the petitioner
Jurisdiction invoked
Original constitutional jurisdiction under the Constitution of Kenya, 2010 (articles 10, 63, 69, 232 invoked); petition filed in the Environment and Land Court

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Endorois Welfare Council v Cabinet Secretary Ministry of Environment, Climate Change and Forestry & 4 others (Environment and Land Petition E01 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 432 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Petition dated February 14, 2025. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/432/eng@2026-02-04

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