By Andrew Kariuki
The High Court has ordered the government to compensate former Taita-Taveta Member of Parliament Basil Criticos with Ksh 30 million for infringing on his constitutional right to property.
In its judgment, the court held that Criticos’ rights under Article 40 of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010, which safeguards the right to property, had been violated through the actions and inaction of state officials.
The court awarded him Ksh 20 million in general damages for the constitutional breach and an additional Ksh 10 million as exemplary and aggravated damages against the respondents.
Criticos had moved to court claiming that between 1998 and 2000, thousands of squatters invaded his sisal estates and that state authorities failed to intervene despite repeated pleas.
He told the court that after he raised concerns about the invasions, he was dismissed from his position as Assistant Minister for Roads and Public Works.
According to his petition, the invasions led to the destruction of his sisal factory and the burning of approximately 4,400 acres of sisal between 1998 and 1999.
He stated that the destruction caused massive financial losses, forced about 1,600 employees out of work and left thousands of casual labourers without livelihoods.
He further claimed that the situation compelled him to flee the county.
Criticos also argued that in 1991 he had sold 23,400 acres of land to the Settlement Fund Trustees for the resettlement of squatters
However, he contended that the government failed to relocate the squatters to the designated land.
Instead, he alleged that various state agencies facilitated the continued occupation of his charged land by providing public utilities and infrastructure.
According to court documents, electricity was connected, roads were constructed, canals rehabilitated and water pipelines installed through Constituency Development Fund projects on the disputed land.
The court was further informed that previous court orders issued in 2005 and 2006 directing the removal of installations from the land were not enforced.
Criticos asserted that police officers failed to act even after being served with the court orders and lists identifying squatters occupying the property.
In its determination, the court found that the conduct of the respondents and their officers amounted to an infringement of Criticos’ property rights and disregard of lawful court directives, justifying an award of damages.
Criticos had sought Ksh.100 million in compensation, arguing that the government’s failure to protect his property prevented him from servicing his debts, which had ballooned due to accumulated interest.
He told the court that he had secured a Ksh.100 million loan, which was to be repaid using proceeds from the subdivision of his land and that he had to obtain a court order to compel the Land Control Board to approve the subdivision.
He also sought an order directing the Government Valuer to assess the value of Land Reference numbers 6731 and 6732, stating that he lacked the financial capacity to conduct a private valuation.
While the court declined to award the full amount sought, it emphasized that constitutional remedies are primarily meant to vindicate rights rather than punish the State.
The judge noted that the purpose of such awards is to affirm constitutional protections and deter future violations.
Importantly, the court observed that the respondents did not file any affidavits to challenge the claims made in the petition, nor did they provide written explanations to justify their actions.
The court held that the failure to rebut serious constitutional allegations effectively amounted to admission of the facts presented.
As a result, the court settled on an award of Ksh 20 million in general damages and Ksh10 million in exemplary and aggravated damages, bringing the total compensation to Ksh 30 million.
