Four Kajiado residents have been awarded a total of Sh600,000 in general damages by the High Court.
This is after the court found that their constitutional rights were violated through the substandard implementation of a road maintenance project on the Acacia Feeder Road in Oloosirkon/Sholinke Ward, Kajiado East subcounty.
The petitioners, Joshua Matiko, Chris Waithanji, Nelson Mutua and Fredrick Kingangir, are officials of the Kitengela Acacia Larger Neighbourhood Association (KALNA) and the Oloika Community Resident Association (OCRA).
They sued the contractor, the County Government of Kajiado and other county officials over the implementation of the Acacia Feeder Road project.
Through Achach and Associates Advocates LLP, the four argued that the respondents abandoned the grading and gravelling of the four-kilometre Acacia Feeder Road despite a Sh3.97 million contract having been awarded in February 2024.
The petitioners told the court that although the contractor was expected to complete the project within six months, work only began in early June 2024 after persistent demands from residents.
According to court documents, they alleged that only about one kilometre of the road was covered using poor-quality murram without proper compaction before the contractor abandoned the site while claiming the works had been completed.
"The petitioners allege that the Acacia Feeder Road has a history of contractors being awarded contracts, collecting public funds and issuing false completion certificates without setting foot on the road, citing the financial year 2021/22 as a precedent," the judgement states.
They further argued that the county failed to supervise the project, resulting in the road being left in a hazardous state, while repeated requests for procurement documents, including the Bill of Quantities, road designs and contract records, were ignored in violation of their constitutional right to access information.
The County Government of Kajiado and its officials opposed the petition, arguing that the High Court lacked jurisdiction because disputes touching on environmental rights should be handled by the Environment and Land Court.
They also maintained that the procurement process complied with the law, the contractor had been competitively awarded the tender and the works had been inspected and certified as complete.
The respondents further argued that the request for procurement documents had been overtaken by events after the records were attached to their replying affidavit.
In its determination, the court rejected the jurisdiction challenge, holding that the dispute primarily concerned enforcement of constitutional rights, including access to information, accountability and integrity, matters that fall within the High Court's mandate.
The court also found that the petition met the constitutional threshold despite objections that it lacked sufficient precision.
On the merits, the judge held that the county government, which bears constitutional responsibility for county roads, failed to ensure the road contract was implemented to the required standards, leaving residents exposed to dust, hazards and an impassable road.
The court found that the omissions by the contractor and county officials violated the petitioners' right to a clean and healthy environment under Article 42 of the Constitution.
"General damages of Sh150,000 each are awarded to the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th Petitioners for the violation of their rights under Articles 35 and 42 of the Constitution, payable by the 2nd Respondent (Kajiado county government)," Justice John Lolwatan ruled.
Additionally, the court ordered an independent inspection of the road, and directed the county to release all procurement records relating to the project.
Justice Lolwatan further ordered that the judgment be forwarded to the Directorate of Criminal Investigations, the Director of Public Prosecutions, the Controller of Budget and the Kajiado County Assembly for appropriate action.
