[2012] KEHC 1810 (KLR)

[2012] KEHC 1810 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant had established a prima facie case for the grant of interim injunctive relief to prevent further environmental degradation of Muangini River. The evidence showed ongoing sand harvesting, uprooting of napier grass, and oil spillage, which threatened the right to a clean and healthy environment as protected under the Constitution. The 17th respondent (NEMA) did not oppose the application in substance and acknowledged enforcement challenges. The court held that Article 70(2)(b) of the Constitution empowers it to compel public officers to take measures to prevent environmental harm. The respondents who denied involvement in sand harvesting would not be...

Citation
[2012] KEHC 1810 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Joseph Muthoka Mapi t/a Muangini River Management Project (CBO); Respondent: Adam Kisoi; Respondent: Benjamin Kiminza; Respondent: Kitavi Mutua; Respondent: Ngei Kiminza; Respondent: Kithuka Vili; Respondent: Kamuti Kitise; Respondent: Musili Makiti; Respondent: Katunge Muindi; Respondent: Lumumba Muindi; Respondent: Mrs Mwayau; Respondent: Mrs Nyelele Ngwili; Respondent: Iluka Ngui; Respondent: Peter Kimeu; Respondent: Dan Mbithi Ndaku; Respondent: Nthiwa Muthiani; Respondent: National Environmental Management Authority (NEMA); Respondent: Water Resources Management Authority; Respondent: The Minister for Provincial Administration and Internal Security; Respondent: The Permanent Secretary Ministry of State for Provincial Administration and Internal Security
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Machakos
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
4 October 2012
Case Number
Petition 163 of 2011
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Ruling on Interlocutory Application for Interim Injunction
Outcome
Application allowed; interim injunctive orders granted as per prayers 3 and 4; costs in the cause.
Judges
GMA Dulu
Legal Topics
Right to Clean Environment, Environmental Injunctions, Public Officer Duties, Sand Harvesting Regulation
Source Language
English
Environmental Law Constitutional Law Right to Clean Environment Environmental Injunctions Public Officer Duties Sand Harvesting Regulation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joseph Muthoka Mapi t/a Muangini River Management Project (CBO)

Applicant

Adam Kisoi

Respondent

Benjamin Kiminza

Respondent

Kitavi Mutua

Respondent

Ngei Kiminza

Respondent

Kithuka Vili

Respondent

Kamuti Kitise

Respondent

Musili Makiti

Respondent

Katunge Muindi

Respondent

Lumumba Muindi

Respondent

Mrs Mwayau

Respondent

Mrs Nyelele Ngwili

Respondent

Iluka Ngui

Respondent

Peter Kimeu

Respondent

Dan Mbithi Ndaku

Respondent

Nthiwa Muthiani

Respondent

National Environmental Management Authority (NEMA)

Respondent

Water Resources Management Authority

Respondent

The Minister for Provincial Administration and Internal Security

Respondent

The Permanent Secretary Ministry of State for Provincial Administration and Internal Security

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Petition / Ruling on Interlocutory Application for Interim Injunction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether interim injunctive orders should issue to restrain environmental degradation of Muangini River pending determination of the petition.
  2. 2 Whether public officers (17th to 20th respondents) can be compelled to enforce environmental laws and prosecute offenders.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant has established a prima facie case for the grant of interim relief.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had established a prima facie case for the grant of interim injunctive relief to prevent further environmental degradation of Muangini River. The evidence showed ongoing sand harvesting, uprooting of napier grass, and oil spillage, which threatened the right to a clean and healthy environment as protected under the Constitution. The 17th respondent (NEMA) did not oppose the application in substance and acknowledged enforcement challenges. The court held that Article 70(2)(b) of the Constitution empowers it to compel public officers to take measures to prevent environmental harm. The respondents who denied involvement in sand harvesting would not be...

Court Disposition

Application allowed; interim injunctive orders granted as per prayers 3 and 4; costs in the cause.

Orders

  • An interim injunction is issued against the 17th to 20th respondents compelling them to arrest and prosecute or cause to be arrested and prosecuted the 1st to 16th respondents, their agents, servants and/or employees and anyone acting through them or under them if found harvesting sand, uprooting napier grass,...
  • An interim injunction is issued against the 17th to 20th respondents compelling them to arrest and prosecute or cause to be prosecuted anyone found harvesting sand, uprooting napier grass, spilling oil and/or fuel or in any other manner enhancing the environmental degradation of Muangini River without the requisite...