The Environment and Land Court in the case of The Law Society of Kenya v Karura Golf Range Limited & 7 others [2026] KEELC 1086 (KLR) issued prohibitory orders restraining NEMA and the Kenya Forest Service (KFS) from reinstating or implementing the EIA License and the Special Use License issued by the said authorities for the development, operation and management of a golf range restaurant and mini-golf park within Miotoni Block of Ngong Road Forest Station in Nairobi.
Background
Ngong Road Forest is a gazetted Central Government Forest Reserve established through proclamation No. 44 of 1932. It originally comprised more than 2,000 hectares though it has since been reduced to approximately 1,224.4 hectares due to both lawful excisions and alleged illegal encroachments. It currently comprises 886.72 hectares of natural forest and 337.68 hectares of plantation forest. The forest is largely indigenous and is presently managed by the Kenya Forest Service in collaboration with the Ngong Road Forest Association, a Community Forest Association.
On diverse dates, that is, 14th June 2023 and 28th November 2024, a Special Use License (SUL) was issued by KFS while an EIA License was issued by NEMA for the development, operation and management of a golf range restaurant and mini-golf park within Miotoni Block of Ngong Road Forest Station in Nairobi.
The Law Society of Kenya challenged the issuance of these two licences by claiming that they violated fundamental rights and freedoms under the Constitution of Kenya. Their central argument was that these licenses violated the right to a clean and healthy environment as per Article 42 of the Constitution of Kenya (CoK) and that the public only became aware of the project after the licenses were issued. They further contended that the project proponent failed to conduct meaningful public participation as required under Article 10 of CoK and that the development posed a risk to a sensitive biodiversity area and a nearby petroleum pipeline wayleave.
On the other hand, Karura Golf Range Limited maintained that the project was an eco-friendly recreational facility designed to comply with sustainable land-use principles. NEMA and KFS argued that the licenses were issued following due process, though NEMA later suspended the EIA license based on the precautionary principle to allow for further risk assessments regarding the pipeline and ecological impact. Kenya Pipeline Corporation clarified it had only given a ‘conditional no-objection’ for the portion of the range overlapping its wayleave and was not involved in the actual licensing.
Court’s Decision
The Environment and Land Court focused on several critical legal failures:
- Lack of Public Participation: The Court found that the public participation process was fundamentally flawed. Evidence showed that the project proponent did not disclose the restaurant and mini golf park components to stakeholders, focusing only on the golf range, which did not meet the constitutional threshold for transparency.
- Misuse of “Special Use” Licences: The court held that under the Forest Conservation and Management Act, a Special Use Licence is reserved for activities whose primary purpose yields public benefit (such as research, education, or energy). A private commercial venture like a restaurant and golf range does not qualify for this type of license.
- Environmental Risk: The Court noted that the regulatory agencies themselves admitted (through suspension letters) that in-depth ecological studies and risk assessments were bypassed during the initial approval.
The Court finally:-
- Declared both the Special Use Licence and the EIA Licence null and void ab initio (from the beginning).
- Quashed the licenses through orders of certiorari.
- Issued prohibitory orders restraining NEMA, KFS, and the Ministry of Environment from implementing or reinstating these licenses.
Key lessons for project proponents are:-
1. Adopt Environmental Compliance as a Core investment strategy – Investors and project proponents should treat environmental compliance as a foundational requirement and not a procedural hurdle as this reduces legal risks thus enhancing long term project viability.
2. Engage in Meaningful Public Participation – Investors and project proponents should disclose all components of a project as it promotes transparency and accountability as well as build trust with all affected persons’ thus reducing litigation risk.
3. Apply the Precautionary Principle Proactively – Where ecological risks exist, regulatory bodies should ensure that project proponents conduct comprehensive environmental impact assessments and provide adequate mitigation measures before seeking approvals.
4. Align Commercial Projects in forest reserves with Public Benefit – Investors must ensure that proposed uses genuinely serve broader environmental or community interests.
Sustainable development entails meeting present developmental needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet theirs. However, even with this requirement being entrenched in our Constitution and other enabling environmental statutes such as the Environmental Management and Coordination Act (EMCA), balancing commercial interests with ecological sustainability is becoming increasingly complex in Kenya especially where due process is being challenged. Therefore, this decision serves as a reminder that project proponents and investors should adopt the Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) principles, that is, ecological stewardship, stakeholder relations and transparent leadership in their projects. This shall assist in converting environmental compliance from a transactional burden into a critical pillar in a project.
The Environment and Land Court in the case of The Law Society of Kenya v Karura Golf Range Limited & 7 others [2026] KEELC 1086 (KLR) issued prohibitory orders restraining NEMA and the Kenya Forest Service (KFS) from reinstating or implementing the EIA License and the Special Use License issued by the said authorities for the development, operation and management of a golf range restaurant and mini-golf park within Miotoni Block of Ngong Road Forest Station in Nairobi.
Background
Ngong Road Forest is a gazetted Central Government Forest Reserve established through proclamation No. 44 of 1932. It originally comprised more than 2,000 hectares though it has since been reduced to approximately 1,224.4 hectares due to both lawful excisions and alleged illegal encroachments. It currently comprises 886.72 hectares of natural forest and 337.68 hectares of plantation forest. The forest is largely indigenous and is presently managed by the Kenya Forest Service in collaboration with the Ngong Road Forest Association, a Community Forest Association.
On diverse dates, that is, 14th June 2023 and 28th November 2024, a Special Use License (SUL) was issued by KFS while an EIA License was issued by NEMA for the development, operation and management of a golf range restaurant and mini-golf park within Miotoni Block of Ngong Road Forest Station in Nairobi.
The Law Society of Kenya challenged the issuance of these two licences by claiming that they violated fundamental rights and freedoms under the Constitution of Kenya. Their central argument was that these licenses violated the right to a clean and healthy environment as per Article 42 of the Constitution of Kenya (CoK) and that the public only became aware of the project after the licenses were issued. They further contended that the project proponent failed to conduct meaningful public participation as required under Article 10 of CoK and that the development posed a risk to a sensitive biodiversity area and a nearby petroleum pipeline wayleave.
On the other hand, Karura Golf Range Limited maintained that the project was an eco-friendly recreational facility designed to comply with sustainable land-use principles. NEMA and KFS argued that the licenses were issued following due process, though NEMA later suspended the EIA license based on the precautionary principle to allow for further risk assessments regarding the pipeline and ecological impact. Kenya Pipeline Corporation clarified it had only given a ‘conditional no-objection’ for the portion of the range overlapping its wayleave and was not involved in the actual licensing.
Court’s Decision
The Environment and Land Court focused on several critical legal failures:
- Lack of Public Participation: The Court found that the public participation process was fundamentally flawed. Evidence showed that the project proponent did not disclose the restaurant and mini golf park components to stakeholders, focusing only on the golf range, which did not meet the constitutional threshold for transparency.
- Misuse of “Special Use” Licences: The court held that under the Forest Conservation and Management Act, a Special Use Licence is reserved for activities whose primary purpose yields public benefit (such as research, education, or energy). A private commercial venture like a restaurant and golf range does not qualify for this type of license.
- Environmental Risk: The Court noted that the regulatory agencies themselves admitted (through suspension letters) that in-depth ecological studies and risk assessments were bypassed during the initial approval.
The Court finally:-
- Declared both the Special Use Licence and the EIA Licence null and void ab initio (from the beginning).
- Quashed the licenses through orders of certiorari.
- Issued prohibitory orders restraining NEMA, KFS, and the Ministry of Environment from implementing or reinstating these licenses.
Key lessons for project proponents are:-
1. Adopt Environmental Compliance as a Core investment strategy – Investors and project proponents should treat environmental compliance as a foundational requirement and not a procedural hurdle as this reduces legal risks thus enhancing long term project viability.
2. Engage in Meaningful Public Participation – Investors and project proponents should disclose all components of a project as it promotes transparency and accountability as well as build trust with all affected persons’ thus reducing litigation risk.
3. Apply the Precautionary Principle Proactively – Where ecological risks exist, regulatory bodies should ensure that project proponents conduct comprehensive environmental impact assessments and provide adequate mitigation measures before seeking approvals.
4. Align Commercial Projects in forest reserves with Public Benefit – Investors must ensure that proposed uses genuinely serve broader environmental or community interests.
Sustainable development entails meeting present developmental needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet theirs. However, even with this requirement being entrenched in our Constitution and other enabling environmental statutes such as the Environmental Management and Coordination Act (EMCA), balancing commercial interests with ecological sustainability is becoming increasingly complex in Kenya especially where due process is being challenged. Therefore, this decision serves as a reminder that project proponents and investors should adopt the Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) principles, that is, ecological stewardship, stakeholder relations and transparent leadership in their projects. This shall assist in converting environmental compliance from a transactional burden into a critical pillar in a project.
