Isiolo, Kenya — Today, a landmark ruling was delivered on the land dispute between the local community and the Northern Rangelands Trust (NRT). The court declared NRT’s “Community Conservancies” illegal. This decision marks a major victory for the people of Isiolo and will have wide-reaching implications.
The court granted the community’s prayers. It found that NRT’s operations violated their constitutional rights and restricted their access to vital resources like grazing land and water points. Residents from Chari Ward, Cherab Ward, and Merti Sub-County, who depend on this land for their pastoral livelihoods, expressed relief. The judgment emphasized Articles 40 and 63 of the Constitution, which protect land ownership and community land rights.
The case focused on whether NRT’s activities followed constitutional and statutory land ownership laws. The court ruled that NRT’s operations ignored both legal standards and the cultural significance of the land to the local communities. This ruling stresses the importance of conservation efforts that respect indigenous rights. These groups often bear the negative effects of conservation initiatives that overlook their needs.
Community members celebrated the ruling as a victory for justice and a crucial step in protecting their ancestral lands. The land represents more than just a resource—it is an integral part of their identity and culture. Leaders from the affected regions described it as a historic decision that ensures their voices will be heard in matters concerning their land.
The ruling also sends a strong message to organizations like NRT, urging them to rethink their operational models. While conservation efforts are important, they must not come at the expense of local communities’ rights. The court emphasized that these organizations must comply with legal frameworks and involve communities in their activities. NRT now has 14 days to appeal the decision if it chooses.
This judgment is a major milestone, not just for the people of Isiolo, but for all communities in Kenya fighting for their land rights. It reaffirms that indigenous groups are primary stakeholders in decisions affecting their land. As the ruling’s full implications unfold, it sets a powerful precedent for future cases. It offers hope for preserving cultural heritage and protecting livelihoods.