REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT BUNGOMA ELC MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO. 18 OF 2021 JOHN WEKESA KHAOYA (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER CENTRE FOR HUMAN RIGHTS ORGANIZATION)..........APPLICANT VERSUS HIS EXCELLENCY WYCLIFFE WAFULA WANGAMATI (THE GOVERNOR BUNGOMA COUNTY)....................1ST DEFENDANT 15th December 2021 Coram: Hon. Boaz N. Olao JUDGE Court Assistant: Lusweti Language: Kiswahili/English ORDER I have perused the Notice of Motion dated 3rd December 2021 and filed on 8th December 2021 under Certificate of Urgency. My understanding of the supporting affidavit is that what the Applicant will be seeking in his substantive application will essentially be an order directed at the Governor Bungoma County to make available for public scrutiny “the report handed in by the Land Inventory team to the Community of Bungoma County to protect the Provisions of Article 3(1) of the Constitution of Kenya 2010.” This is as per paragraph 7 of the Applicant’s supporting affidavit. That cannot be a matter falling under the jurisdiction of this Court as provided under Section 13 of the Environment and Land Court Act. It is a dispute over whether or not the Governor should be made to avail a report. Although the word “land” is referred to in the affidavit, this is not really one of those “disputes relating to environment and land” which this Court is mandated to determine by Section 13 of the said Act. However, rather than striking the application out, I direct that it be transferred to the High and be placed before KEMEI J for further directions. Orders accordingly. BOAZ N. OLAO. JUDGE 15th December 2021.
Original judgment
John Wekesa Khaoya (Chief Executive Officer, Centre for Human Rights Organization) v Wycliffe Wafula Wangamati [2021] KEELC 282 (KLR)
A note on accuracy. These pages are generated automatically from our AI-written case briefs and have not been checked by a lawyer. Case titles and citations come from Kenya Law; the counts, topics, propositions and “treatment” labels are derived from the briefs and can be incomplete or wrong. Use them as a research aid and always read the original judgment before relying on anything here. This is not legal advice.