Entry Instance

HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept

{
    "id": 1299991,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1299991/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 89,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Sen. (Prof.) Tom Ojienda, SC",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Sir. Let me contribute to this question with the background of litigation in this area. The people of Kisii must be guided by a number of things. The first is the Gazette Notice that acquired this land for purposes of the two institutions; KARI and Kenya Farmers Training Centre (KFTC). This Gazette Notice will remain alive until the objectives are exterminated or spent. I have had the advantage of doing cases in this area. I have done a case for Sony Sugar on the acquisition of land from individual citizens. After the purpose was used for the establishment of the sugar factory, the original owners came to court to claim parts of land that had been used to develop Awendo Town. This is a matter that we litigated to the Supreme Court which held that titles once acquired and compensation made to original owners, cannot revert back to those original owners. This is the question that the Petitioners find themselves in. Mr. Speaker, Sir, currently, we have a live issue of the land question in Mavoko. The land of the East African Portland Cement has been acquired by other people using fake titles and subsequently subdivided. Another 500 acres of land for Numerical Machining Complex (NMC) belonging to the Government has been acquired by five parties using the same mechanism. Therefore, I would advise that where land acquisition is involved, under the Land Acquisition Act Cap294; or under the framework now guided by the National Land Commission (NLC), the Committee will have to examine the purpose for which the land was set apart. Only if and when that purpose has been extinguished, can part of that 300 acres revert to the public and will then be available for allocation by NLC. Other than that, the original purpose must be met first. Let these institutions be created and if they say they require only 200 out of the 300 acres, only then can 100 acres revert. Since there was compensation – because that was the beginning of acquisition – that land will revert to the Government and will then be available for allocation to third parties. Perhaps that is when these individuals and their grandsons can claim priority because they are the original owners, but they were compensated."
}