By Andrew Kariuki
A petition has been filed at the Environment and Land Court in Milimani seeking to halt the proposed seizure of approximately 76 acres of land from Nairobi National Park for the expansion of the Bomas of Kenya, in what is shaping up to be a major legal and environmental dispute.
In the case filed as ELC Petition No. E011 of 2026, petitioner Matasi Yatundu has moved to court against Tourism and Wildlife Cabinet Secretary Rebecca Miano, with the Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS), the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC) and the Kenya Forest Service (KFS) listed as interested parties.
According to the petition, the proposed takeover forms part of a government-backed plan to expand and redevelop the Bomas of Kenya cultural centre and relocate the Nairobi Animal Orphanage. The project has been described as a multi-billion shilling development valued at approximately Ksh41.9 billion.
However, the petitioner argues that the process leading to the proposed seizure was undertaken in a manner that lacked transparency, public participation and accountability, contrary to constitutional requirements. He claims that no meaningful stakeholder engagement was conducted and that critical information regarding the project was withheld from the public.
Court documents indicate that although an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) study was reportedly undertaken and a licence issued, the petitioner maintains that neither the EIA report nor the licence has been made publicly available. He argues that this has denied the public an opportunity to interrogate the environmental, ecological and socio-economic implications of the project.
The petition further raises concerns over the absence of parliamentary approval for the excision of the land, which is classified as public land held in trust for the people of Kenya. The petitioner contends that any excision undertaken without strict adherence to constitutional and statutory procedures would be unlawful and unconstitutional.
According to the filings, the proposed reduction of the park’s acreage is likely to disrupt wildlife habitats, interfere with established migration corridors within the Nairobi–Athi-Kapiti ecosystem and increase human-wildlife conflict in the surrounding areas.
The petitioner argues that Nairobi National Park is a critical conservation area and a key habitat for endangered and migratory species and that any reduction of its size poses a significant threat to its ecological integrity.
In the petition, Yatundu alleges that the actions of the respondent amount to violations of several constitutional provisions, including those relating to environmental protection, public participation, transparency and the right to a clean and healthy environment.
He further claims that the conduct surrounding the proposed excision raises issues of abuse of office and possible irregularities in the allocation and use of public land.
Through an application filed under a certificate of urgency, the petitioner is seeking conservatory orders to restrain the government from proceeding with the excision or implementation of the project pending the hearing and determination of the case.
Among the orders sought are declarations that the proposed excision is unconstitutional, illegal and null and void; orders compelling the immediate release of the Environmental Impact Assessment report and licence; and injunctions to prevent any further interference with land within Nairobi National Park.
The petitioner is also seeking orders requiring relevant state agencies to account for the decision-making process and to ensure compliance with constitutional and statutory safeguards governing public land and environmental protection.
The matter is now before the Environment and Land Court, which is expected to issue directions on the hearing of both the application and the substantive petition.
