The High Court has suspended the implementation of a proposed project at Imenti State Lodge, issuing conservatory orders to preserve the site until a constitutional petition challenging the development is heard and determined.
The petition was filed by activist Francis Awino and three other petitioners, who contend that the project raises constitutional concerns relating to environmental conservation, public participation, fair administrative action and the management of public land.
In a ruling delivered on Thursday, the court held that allowing the project to proceed before the case is determined could result in irreversible environmental damage and render the petition meaningless if the applicants ultimately succeed.
The judge noted that work on the project had already commenced, observing that any further progress could permanently change the area and make it impossible to restore it to its original state.
“The project has started and restoring the status quo may not be possible if it proceeds,” the court stated.
The court also found that denying the conservatory orders would deprive the petitioners of an effective remedy, as a favourable judgment delivered after completion of the project would serve little practical purpose.
In reaching its decision, the court applied the precautionary principle, holding that where there is a credible risk of serious or irreversible environmental harm, it is prudent to preserve the subject matter of the dispute until the constitutional questions raised are fully determined.
Consequently, the court allowed the Notices of Motion dated June 8 and June 26, 2026, halting the implementation of the impugned project together with any related government actions pending the hearing of the petition.
The judge observed that the conservatory orders were necessary to safeguard constitutional values, including the protection of the environment under Articles 10 and 69 of the Constitution, while the court considers the issues raised by the petitioners.
According to the petition, the proposed development violates Articles 10, 42, 47, 62, 69 and 70 of the Constitution. The petitioners argue that public forests are public land held in trust for present and future generations and that the State has a constitutional duty to conserve and protect them.
The court directed the respondents to file and serve their responses to the petition within seven days, after which Francis Awino and the other petitioners will have a further seven days to file and serve their written submissions.
The matter will be mentioned on September 28, 2026, for further directions and to confirm compliance with the court’s timelines.
