NAIROBI, Kenya — The High Court has awarded former Taita-Taveta MP Basil Criticos Sh30 million in damages after finding that the State violated his constitutional right to property under the Constitution of Kenya.
In a detailed judgment delivered in Nairobi, the court held that Criticos was unlawfully deprived of his property contrary to Article 40, which guarantees every person the right to acquire and own property and protects against arbitrary deprivation.
The court awarded Sh20 million in general damages for the constitutional violation and an additional Sh10 million in exemplary and aggravated damages, holding the respondents liable for both their actions and omissions.
Estate invasion and destruction
Criticos told the court that between 1998 and 2000, thousands of people invaded his sisal estates in Taita-Taveta County. Despite repeated pleas to government authorities for intervention, no effective action was taken.
During the unrest, his sisal factory was burned down, and 4,400 acres of sisal were destroyed between 1998 and 1999. He described the losses as catastrophic.
About 1,600 permanent employees lost their jobs, while thousands of casual labourers were rendered jobless. He further testified that he was eventually forced to flee the county due to security concerns.
Criticos also alleged that after publicly protesting the invasions, he was dismissed from his position as Assistant Minister for Roads and Public Works.
Failure to resettle squatters
The former legislator argued that in 1991, he sold 23,400 acres to the Settlement Fund Trustees for the specific purpose of resettling squatters. However, the State allegedly failed to relocate them.
Instead, he claimed, government agencies facilitated settlement on his charged property by extending electricity, constructing roads, rehabilitating canals, and installing water pipelines through Constituency Development Fund projects — actions he argued legitimised the occupation.
The court heard that orders issued in 2005 and 2006 directing the removal of installations from the land were never enforced. Police allegedly failed to act despite being served with court orders and provided with lists identifying those occupying the property.
Court’s findings
In its determination, the court found that the respondents’ conduct — including failure to enforce court orders — amounted to a clear infringement of Criticos’ constitutional rights.
Although Criticos sought Sh100 million in compensation, arguing that the invasions prevented him from servicing a Sh100 million loan secured against the property, the court declined to award the full amount.
He had argued that the loan was to be repaid through proceeds from subdivided land, but he required a court order to compel the Land Control Board to approve the subdivision.
He also sought orders compelling the Government Valuer to assess Land Reference numbers 6731 and 6732, citing a lack of financial capacity to commission a private valuation.
The judge emphasised that constitutional damages are primarily vindicatory — meant to affirm rights and deter future violations rather than purely punish the State. The court concluded that Sh20 million in general damages and Sh10 million in exemplary damages constituted fair and proportionate compensation.
Significantly, the respondents did not file any responses or affidavits to rebut the allegations. No evidence was tendered to justify the impugned actions or omissions, leaving the petitioner’s claims unchallenged.
