Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 809406,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/809406/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 297,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Kitui South, JP",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. (Ms.) Rachael Nyamai",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 13374,
        "legal_name": "Richard Ken Chonga Kiti",
        "slug": "richard-ken-chonga-kiti"
    },
    "content": "The Committee also observed that although evidence was tabled to show that there was an allotment letter issued by the Commissioner of Lands supposedly on the land currently being occupied by the two schools, the Committee did not find evidence to confirm that subdivision of the land did occur. This matter of subdivision is a very interesting matter in this Report because this is not the first acquisition that was happening on this land, it was acquired for General Service Unit (GSU) and also the Ministry of Transport. This is the third time that acquisition was happening but there is no evidence of subdivision for all these years. The Committee observed that the Attorney-General’s opinion on the two parcels of land was advisory in nature and only to the extent that the Commission could process the acquisition of the said land in accordance with the law. We are fully aware that there was a letter from the Attorney-General but it was very clear that the Commission was told that they should have processed the documents accordingly. The Attorney-General observed that the question as to whether the due process of law was followed by the Commission in acquiring the land lay under the purview of the Commission itself. This is the institution that should have advised the Ministry and all Government agencies that are involved in this acquisition. The Committee also observed that the concerned Principal Secretary of the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology wrote to the National Treasury seeking to know the budget implication of the proposed acquisition of the land occupied by the two schools prior to receiving advice from the Attorney-General. We found that this was not in order. Hon. Temporary Deputy Speaker, the Committee also observed with concern that the two schools occupied the land for an uninterrupted period of at least 33 years. I will not explore further that matter because I have discussed it. The fact that they were there for 33 years shows infrastructure on the schools had been built over the years following allocation of funds through the Economic Stimulus Programme (ESP). For sure, there was Government ownership of this place. Various approvals were sought for the development projects including installation of electricity transmission lines from various government entities. As a Committee, we feel that there was some motivation not to have the subdivision of this land completed. Further, the Committee observed that the Physical Planning Act Cap 286 requires that whenever land is being proposed to be developed, a person is required to surrender land for public utility purpose. The Committee noted with concern that even though the land had been subject to various development projects including the 196 houses acquired by the GSU, the Ministry of Lands and Physical Planning, Ministry of Education, Science and Technology and the County Government of Nairobi failed to follow up on the surrender of the land occupied for the two public schools in furtherance of the provisions of the Act. The Committee also observed that Afrison Import Export Ltd and Huelands failed to comply with the Physical Planning Act No. 6 of 1996 which requires a person to surrender land for public utility and purpose. Bearing in mind that this was a huge piece of land, there must have been some land which should have been surrendered to Government. The Committee also observed that the title LR. No 7879/4 was jointly held by the official receiver and Messrs Harit Sheth and Co. Advocates; the advocates for the registered owner. Further, the official receiver was supposed to facilitate issuance of a title for the land purchased. It did not happen. In addition, the Committee also observed that Afrison Import Export Ltd and Huelands had in the past been beneficiaries of compensation of acquisition of GSU land and other pieces of land portraying lack of planning and management in compulsory acquisition of the pieces of land. You will realise that land went to the GSU, later, it went to the Ministry of Lands and The electronic version of the Official Hansard Report is for information purposes only. Acertified version of this Report can be obtained from the Hansard Editor."
}