Garissa Township MP Aden Duale has poked holes into a petition agitating for the removal of Kenya Defence Forces from a disputed land in Roysambu, Nairobi county.
Duale, on the “mysterious petition”, said that it beat logic how anyone would want to evict KDF from such land.
He argued that the Lands committee chaired by Kitui South MP Rachel Nyamai ignored critical elements in the probe before recommending KDF’s ouster from the property.
The question he wants answered is how the land was transferred to employees who used to work there after Mayer Jacob Samuels - the owner, died and his sons deported.
Mayer’s lease expired in 2003 and the land reverted to the county government of Nairobi before allocations to the current claimants, including a firm trading as Solio Construction.
“The land was cleverly allocated to the “workers” who used to work in the farm. Nothing can be as clear as this. This is pure fraud,” Duale said.
"We need to know the owners of Solio Construction; who deported the sons of the original owner and who signed the deportation order. What was the role of Uchumi in this matter?" he asked.
Another controversy is that the land in question had over five parties laying claim on it, each with ownership documents.
Duale revealed that the same land has over three files opened and functional at the Land Registry.
“This is clearly a case of not just mere allocation of land but one that requires the determination of ownership of land,” he said.
The lawmaker argued that the committee should not have should not have considered the matters in the first place.
“Article 119 of the Constitution is clear that this House can only be petitioned to consider matters within its authority,” the MP said.
His argument was that the House has no power to uphold the petitioners’ right to occupy, reside, do business and own the said land.
The MPs also argued that it was not within the authority of National Assembly to expedite the issuance of subtitles/leases.
“Is it possible for this House to preserve the title deeds issued for public purposes? The answer is no,” Duale added.
“Is it within the authority of this House to order compensation for the demolition of the petitioners ‘premises? The answer is no.”
His take is that the prayers fall within the purview of a court of law to issue orders to the petitioners.
“The right audience should have been the Court and not this House. We should not be seen as encroaching on the jurisdiction of the courts,” Duale said.
“We should not be seen as conferring ourselves authority or powers that the Constitution did not confer upon us as this would be tantamount to redrafting the Constitution.”
He held that the petition was a clear abuse of the proceedings of the August House and an affront to the Constitution.
