NAIROBI, Kenya Mar 24 — Housing Principal Secretary Charles Hinga has defended the controversial Southlands Affordable Housing Project in Lang’ata, maintaining that all legal, environmental, and procedural requirements were fully met.
In a replying affidavit filed before the High Court, Hinga dismissed claims raised in a petition challenging the project, asserting that extensive public participation was conducted in line with constitutional and statutory provisions.
According to the PS, the engagement process included household surveys, key informant interviews, and public barazas across Kibra Lots 1 to 5 in Mugumo-ini Ward within Lang’ata Constituency.
Initial consultations held at Ngei Primary School were disrupted by fears of forced evictions.
However, Hinga said the forums were relocated to project sites to ensure broader and more meaningful participation.
“The barazas provided stakeholders with adequate opportunity to present their views, seek clarifications, and contribute to the planning process,” he stated.
Residents reportedly raised concerns about housing allocation, affordability, job opportunities, infrastructure, and environmental impact. Hinga noted that the government assured locals there would be no forced displacement and that housing allocation would be conducted transparently through the Boma Yangu platform.
On environmental compliance, Hinga said an Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) report was submitted to the National Environment Management Authority (NEMA) on September 21, 2025.
The agency later issued an Environmental Impact Assessment licence on December 16, 2025, approving the project subject to regulatory conditions.
He further stated that consultations with aviation authorities and the Kenya Defence Forces confirmed compliance with safety and security requirements, with no objections raised from nearby Wilson Airport or Lang’ata Barracks.
Responding to allegations of encroachment on road and railway reserves, Hinga maintained that the land was lawfully allocated for residential development under existing government planning frameworks.
The PS also warned that continued suspension of the project through conservatory court orders could lead to significant financial losses, contract terminations, and safety risks at the stalled construction site.
He urged the court to consider proportional remedies that allow the project to proceed while addressing any concerns raised, citing public interest and the government’s constitutional obligation to provide affordable housing.
“The petition lacks merit, and continued delay undermines the State’s constitutional mandate to provide accessible and adequate housing,” Hinga said, urging the court to dismiss the case with costs.
