8 January 2014
Imminent forced eviction by Kenya threatens indigenous communities' human rights and ancestral forests
The Kenyan government has sent police troops to Embobut forest area (in Elgeyo Marakwet County, Western Kenya) to
forcefully evict thousands of the indigenous inhabitants of the Sengwer and Cherangany communities from their ancestral
forestlands. The eviction is expected to commence as early as tomorrow.
Reports from community members in Embobut tell of a chaotic situation, as people are threatened and are fleeing their
homes with their children and belongings in fear of their safety. 150 police and forest guards including also 30 General
Service Unit riot police are massing to carry out the evictions from the three locations of Tangul, Kipsitono and Maron
near the forest. More troops may join.
Such a forced eviction would not only be a severe violation of the Kenyan Constitution and international law on human
rights, and on biodiversity conservation and sustainable use, but would also be in contempt of an injunction secured at
the High Court in Eldoret which forbids any such evictions until the issue of these communities rights to their land is
resolved. Article 63 (d) of the Kenyan Constitution recognises the rights of communities to own ancestral lands
traditionally occupied by hunter-gatherers.
An International Appeal from environmental and human rights organisations from Kenya, Africa and all around the world highlights this violation
of these communities’ rights. The Appeal was sent on Monday to the Kenyan President and Government as well as to the
United Nations authorities concerned with Human Rights and biodiversity, in order to protect the rights of the
indigenous communities.
The forced eviction of these indigenous communities is illegal - and even more so if it is carried out through violent
acts such as the burning of homes, school uniforms, books and means of livelihood. Such forced evictions have been
carried out repeatedly (most recently in May 2013 despite the interim injunction), but this time the Government is
serious about permanently removing communities (and this, despite not having undertaken any meaningful attempt to secure
peoples free prior and informed consent to such a process).
Evicting these indigenous communities of Embobut against their will from their ancestral lands would be a severe human
rights violation. One that the government has tried to justify through public misinformation:
• While the government says that all people to be evicted – including the indigenous inhabitants of the area - are
‘squatters’, the indigenous inhabitants of the area are the opposite of 'squatters'.
• While the government claims it is evicting the indigenous communities in order to protect the forest
biodiversity, Kenya’s official commitments (internationally recognised by the CBD, IUCN, etc.) require the state to
secure the forest biodiversity by supporting – not destroying - practices adapted to its local regeneration, including
the practices of indigenous communities which have sustained their ancestral forests for centuries.(1)
• The government says it has given compensation for the ‘evictees’, but it is recognised internationally and under
the Kenyan Constitution that due compensation for evicting indigenous communities from their ancestral lands requires
due procedures of consultation and the free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) of the indigenous communities. Such
consultation has not been undertaken, and such consent has not been given. Instead, there has been conflicting advice
from Government authorities with some saying (off the record) that the money is given as compensation for the harm
caused by past evictions and burnings of homes; while others saying (on the record) that all inhabitants have to leave.
If some indigenous inhabitants have accepted compensation for the past harms they suffered in the earlier violent and
harsh displacements that certainly does not mean agreement to being forcibly evicted again.(2)
Instead of evicting indigenous communities from their ancestral lands without due consultation, consent and legally
approved compensation the government needs to sit down with the communities to find a way of protecting their rights to
care for their forest lands in compliance with their traditional indigenous knowledge, innovations and practices and
through that to support them to protect their forest. This is required by Kenya's constitution, including in
constitutional provisions that make Kenya’s commitments under international law an integral part of the law of Kenya.
This includes laws in the UN and African regional human rights systems, as well as relevant law on conservation of
biodiversity and environment. The State is responsible for respecting the life, culture, will and knowledge of Embobut's
indigenous communities, whose life has been adapted through centuries to gain their livelihoods from the regeneration of
the Embobut forests and from respecting and protecting these forests on which they depend.
The forced eviction in Embobut would violate not only the rights of the indigenous communities, but also the many human
rights of other vulnerable inhabitants of the area. It is also wrong to treat as illegal 'squatters' those people who
have moved into Embobut because they have lost their homes from the effect of landslides or due to past electoral
violence, and who therefore have had no place to live. The government is responsible for securing the safety, homes,
livelihoods and human rights of these already displaced vulnerable victims as well. This requires much more than giving
them a small amount of money and blaming them for not surviving on it.
In conjunction with the authorised UN agencies and international community, but above all through dialogue with the
communities themselves, the government and Parliament can duly fulfil Kenya's constitutional and international
obligations on indigenous communities' rights, and on their continued conservation and sustainable use of the
biodiversity of their ancestral forest lands (see the Appeal). The government needs to determine with all the
inhabitants who is willing to leave (and on the basis of what financial or other support), and who is willing to stay
(and what sustainability bylaws they wish to codify to ensure their continued use of their forest lands is sustainable
for themselves and their future generations).
ENDS