The Principal Secretary for the State Department of Housing and Urban Development, Charles Hinga has defended the Southlands Affordable Housing Project in Langata, insisting that all legal, environmental, and procedural requirements were fully met despite ongoing court challenges.
In a replying affidavit filed in response to a petition challenging the project, PS Hinga says that extensive public participation was undertaken in accordance with constitutional and statutory requirements.
He argues that the process involved household surveys, key informant interviews, and public barazas across Kibra Lots 1 to 5 in Mugumo-ini Ward, Langata Constituency.
Hinga revealed that initial meetings held at Ngei Primary School were disrupted by rumors of forced displacement, but the consultations were promptly relocated to project sites to ensure inclusive and meaningful engagement.
Community members, youth leaders, ministry officials, and consultants attended the barazas, raising concerns about housing allocation, affordability, employment opportunities, infrastructure, and potential environmental impacts.
“The barazas provided stakeholders with adequate opportunity to present their views, seek clarifications, and contribute to the planning process,” Hinga said, emphasizing that residents were assured no forced displacements would occur and that allocations would be transparent through the government’s Boma Yangu portal.
Employment opportunities for local youth were also highlighted as part of the project’s social benefits.
Addressing environmental concerns, Hinga argues that that the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) report was submitted to the National Environment Management Authority (NEMA) on 21st September 2025 adding that NEMA subsequently issued an Environmental Impact Assessment licence on 16th December 2025, authorizing the project subject to regulatory safeguards.
He further adds that consultations with aviation authorities and the Kenya Defence Forces showed full compliance with safety and security requirements, with no objections received from Wilson Airport or Langata Barracks.
On allegations that the project encroached on road and rail reserves or buffer zones, Hinga states that the land had been lawfully allocated for residential development under government planning frameworks.
The PS further warned that prolonged suspension of the project under conservatory court orders could result in financial losses, contract terminations, litigation, and safety hazards at the unoccupied construction site.
He has urged the court to adopt remedial measures that would allow the project to continue while addressing any procedural concerns, citing Supreme Court guidance on proportionality and public interest.
“The Petition lacks merit, and continued delay undermines the State’s constitutional mandate to provide accessible and adequate housing,” Hinga concluded, asking the court to dismiss the petition with costs.
