Kirima family land

It’s been a big relief to read in some local media outlets that the Kirima family has undertaken not to subject those settled on its Nairobi land to evictions. It’s been reported that the family is willing to dispose the land to the current occupants on a “willing buyer willing seller” basis. This, they observe, will avert evictions associated with cruel demolitions and destruction of property. This is a perfect win-win situation to family and occupants. The Kirima land is vast, stranding parts of Njiru in Nairobi’s Eastlands.

Unplanned, unapproved settlements and structures

However, since construction thereon was ad hoc, illegal and hurried, no standard planning or surveying was done. No building standards were observed. Hence no regard was paid to Nairobi City planning standards, or those stipulated by the National Construction Authority (NCA). This includes the provision of standard road widths, wayleaves for service infrastructure and open spaces for recreation. The structures were erected without regard to architectural and structural requirements. No regard was paid to zoning standards to militate a rational balance of residential and commercial uses. The structures erected only suited the whims of the gatekeepers responsible for allowing entry into the land, and perhaps the cash paid out. This is a perfect nightmare for planners, service providers and construction regulatory authorities in any city.

Conditional transfer of title

If the Kirima settlement deal translates into desired ownership documents, this will have added onto an emerging trend of invasion-driven settlements where title to private land is circumstantially conveyed to unauthorized occupiers. Another memorable example, where government purchased private land then regularized informal occupation, was the Waitiki farm in Kenya’s South Coast done in 2016. In such cases, standard planning and construction procedures are shelved for the political expediency of respecting the “facts-on-the-ground”, rather, the haphazard web of roads, dwelling and commercial units put in place by the unauthorized occupiers. Ordinarily, to convey titles and construct buildings, original landowners would have been required to comply with County planning requirements and, for the individual beneficiaries, NCA’s construction standards. Basic service infrastructure would also need to be provided. In these reversed circumstances, planning and construction authorities will have to get innovative.

Constrained planning and building approvals

I suppose that in order for the Kirima family to convey individual titles to occupiers, it will need to provide some appropriate plan to the Nairobi County government, and to the Lands Ministry. For good results, there will need to be close collaboration between the family, representatives of the occupants and City authorities in order to ensure that the settlement integrates some planning basics. This includes enabling service infrastructure along with education, health, social and commercial facilities. NCA will have to see how best to ensure that structures erected within the settlement won’t be our next pain point with building collapses.

Ultimately, invasion-driven settlements subvert procedures, planning and construction standards. They undermine the rights of legitimate landowners. National and County governments are obliged to prevent them. The Lands Ministry should provide them with the required technical support.

Dated: 18th January, 2024