A former banker and his wife are seeking Sh12 million from the state as compensation for the loss of property and trauma suffered at the height of the 2007/2008 post-election violence.

Bethuel Njuguna and his wife Fidelis Wanjiru, in a joint affidavit, said the state failed to protect them and their children during the violence that rocked the country after the announcement of the presidential election results.

During this period, more than 1,000 people lost their lives, thousands were displaced from their homes, and property worth billions of shillings was either destroyed or looted in various parts of the country. 

Njuguna, a resident of Kuresoi in Nakuru county, said he lost his English mansion valued at Sh9.7 million on his 127.5 acres of land. Additionally, he suffered losses of assorted farm machinery worth Sh1.4 million and Sh273,500 in crops and livestock.

Nakuru High Court judge Heston Nyaga, who is presiding over the case, on Wednesday said the court will visit the scene. 

“The Deputy Registrar will visit the scene on November 30, and I will give guidance,” Nyaga said.

• 
• Defence Ministry under fire over delay to pay Sh1.8b awards

The banker, while testifying, said he was a government worker at Kenya Commercial Bank (KCB) and not a politician, questioning why the state failed to protect his family.

Expressing his grievances, Njuguna said the government failed and neglected to discharge its duty to gather relevant intelligence and put mechanisms in place to maintain peace, law, and order which led to him being displaced and his property ruined. 

“As a result of violence my family and I were displaced, our property destroyed, vandalised and looted thereby rendering us homeless, destitute which is a humiliating experience,” Njuguna said.

The land, he said, was bought in 1971 from a foreigner and has been his home since, but now his family is unable to return and recover their property. 

His son Samuel Mbugua said his parents managed to travel to Nairobi where he lives on January 12, 2008, but three days later he received a call from farm workers that the violence was near their farm.

“I called the OCS to inform him of the same and request for police officers to protect my father’s home, the OCS said he was unable to do that,” he added. The house, Mbugua said was attacked five days later, with the worker managing to escape, but 13 heads of cattle were stolen.

After the incident, following an intervention, he said that police visited the homestead but failed to assist. “Then on February 7, burglars broke into the house. The DO didn’t respond to my calls, and the house was set ablaze two days later,” he added. 

He accused security agencies of failing his family by not responding and protecting the properties even with the resources at their disposal.

The state through an affidavit by E.N Njuguna denied the allegations of negligence, maintaining it has never renounced its duty of maintaining peace, law and order.

“The defendant denies any failure by the government to protect and defend the constitution putting the plaintiff to strict proof to the contrary,” read the state affidavit. By Julius Chepkwony, The Standard

The Rwanda migration plan remains “crucial” to stopping small boats crossings in the Channel, Rishi Sunak has insisted – but he dismissed the idea of ditching human rights laws to deliver it.

Conservative MPs have accused the Prime Minister of not doing enough to force the scheme through the courts after it was blocked over fears the rights of asylum seekers deported to Rwanda would be at risk.

And they responded with anger when James Cleverly, the new Home Secretary, said the policy was not “the be all and end all” of controlling illegal migration. 

But Mr Sunak insisted he was committed to ensuring that the UK can send migrants who arrive illegally to Rwanda as a deterrent to reduce the number of Channel crossings.

Speaking as he travelled to the COP 28 climate summit in Dubai, the Prime Minister said: “We are already, incredibly frustratingly for the British people and the taxpayer, spending billions to house illegal migrants in hotels, and that’s not right, I’ve talked about it repeatedly, we have got to end that.

“And we’re not going to end that unless we can have a successful deterrent that stops people from coming here, right? Because that in the long run is the billions that we need to save.”

He claimed the Government was “making progress” in light of statistics showing that crossings are down by roughly a third, but added: “In order to get the job done we do need to stand up the Rwanda plan because I want a functioning deterrent. 

“We’ve seen that deterrents work, we’ve seen it in Albania. Because we are now returning people back to Albania as a result of the new agreement that we have, as part of the diplomacy and statecraft that we’ve conducted over the past year, you’ve seen the numbers coming from Albania drop by 90 per cent, right? That tells you that deterrents work, so if you can have a functioning deterrent system, people will stop coming. And we need to now replicate that on a bigger scale, that’s why Rwanda’s crucial.”

Asked if Britain would have to withdraw from the jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights in order to ensure the Rwanda policy is not stopped by the courts, the Prime Minister said: “I am completely confident everything that we are doing complies with our international obligations. I have been through this in great detail and I am confident of that fact.”

Mr Sunak added: “I will not let a foreign court stop us from getting a flight off, I am crystal clear we are in compliance with all those obligations and I know the Government and the party is united behind that position, but also the country is united on this. I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again, everyone’s patience is wearing thin.”

Ministers are set to table legislation as soon as next week which will define Rwanda in law as a “safe country” for deportations. They are also finalising a treaty with Rwanda’s government which will contain pledges to safeguard the rights of deportees. By Hugo Gye, I News

The Kakamega county government is contemplating moving to court to sue the state over the ongoing demolitions in Milimani estate.
Governor Fernandes Barasa said his administration will be seeking millions of shillings in compensation. 

Speaking when he visited Milimani estate yesterday, Barasa said his administration was not consulted by the national government over the demolitions.

“We are an interested party in this matter because part of this land belongs to the defunct municipality and on that basis, the land is automatically under county government. We are going to be enjoined in a suit against the national government which has acted through the office of Regional Commissioner so that victims can be compensated,” said the governor. 

He accused Western Regional Commissioner Irungu Macharia of aiding the demolition on behalf of the national government in contravention of court order.

“We were not part of the ongoing demolitions and we never authorized it, what is going on is on the mercies of the Regional Commissioner who is acting on behalf of the national government and we will be moving to court against what he has done," said the county chief.

The governor termed the demolition 'impunity of the highest order' after the Kakamega Law Courts issued orders stopping the exercise.
“We are going to court to stop the ongoing demolition and it is so unfortunate that the government has decided to act in contempt of court orders and decided to go on with the demolitions at night," said Barasa. 

He termed the move by the national government a threat to devolution saying the demolition is selective and only county government buildings and those of private individuals are being targeted.

“The state has an ill motive, the demolitions are discriminatory because we are only seeing the county buildings being demolished and those that belong to the national government are being spared, this is a threat to devolution and violation of the Constitution,” said Barasa. By Bernard Lusigi, The Standard