The CS said although there have been intentions to alter the forest boundaries to accommodate other uses, the process has not been concluded.
“The Ministry considered the matter through the Gazzete Notice No. 891 published on 30th January, 2001 for alteration of the forest boundary in respect of L.R. No. 25005. However, no further regularization process was done to effect the forest boundary alteration,” she said.
The CS maintained that any change in its status must follow the law.
The clarification follows a petition to Parliament by the Ogiek community seeking the conversion of the land into community land to allow for human settlement.
The community argues that it has historical ties to the area and wants the government to facilitate the conversion of part of the forest land (LR. No.25005, Kericho/Samburet) for settlement.
The petition presented to the House on behalf of Chang Kelek Kipsigis, Ogiek Squatters from Kericho, raises concerns on historical land injustices.
However, the CS maintained that the land remains protected as public forest until the boundary alteration process is legally completed.
She told the National Assembly Committee on Lands that records currently available at the Ministry reveal that L.R. No. 25005 falls within the gazetted South Western Mau Forest and has not been lawfully degazetted or excised through the procedure prescribed by law and therefore remains part of the public forest.
“The overall legal position is that L.R. No. 25005 should continue to be treated as part of the South Western Mau public forest unless and until its status is lawfully altered,” she insisted.
She noted the land is one of the forest blocks within Mau complex, gazetted as a Forest Reserve, via proclamation No. 44 of 1932.
The piece of land, she noted, was later declared a Central Forest via Legal Notice No. 174 of 20th May, 1964 covering an area of 90,731.3 Ha (224,197 acres).
“Records presently available at the Ministry indicate that L.R. No. 25005 is within the gazetted South Western Mau Forest. Over the years, there have been intentions to alter the forest boundaries to exclude portions for other land uses,” the CS stated.
“Any proposal to alter the forest boundary must be processed in accordance with section 34, including the role of the Ministry and the KFS Board in making the statutory recommendation, satisfaction of the environmental and conservation safeguards, consideration by the relevant parliamentary committee and the National Assembly, and subsequent gazettement by the Cabinet Secretary where Parliament approves the variation.”
The lawmakers sought explanation whether a portion of Kenya forest land excised in 2001 (via Legal Notice No. 328 of 30th January 2001) from South West Mau/Kericho to form land parcel L.R. No.25005 for human settlement.
In her response, Barasa said that the petitioners rely on Legal Notice No. 328 of 30th January 2001 as part of the historical basis for their claim.
“The publication of an intention to alter boundaries is not, by itself, conclusive evidence that the forest was lawfully degazetted or that L.R. No. 25005 was thereby converted into land available for allocation or settlement. The records presently before the Ministry do not establish that the statutory process required to complete the alteration was lawfully concluded,” she explained.
INSTANT ANALYSIS
The petition has since drawn the attention of Parliament, with the community seeking government intervention to resolve its long-standing land concerns while balancing the demand for settlement against the need to protect forest resources
