Housing Battle: Charles Hinga Defends Lang’ata Project Amid Court Challenge

The Principal Secretary for Housing and Urban Development, Charles Hinga, has strongly defended the controversial Southlands Affordable Housing Project in Lang’ata, insisting that all legal, environmental, and public participation requirements were fully met despite an ongoing court petition seeking to halt the development.

Government Pushback in Court

In a replying affidavit filed before the High Court, Hinga argues that the project complies with constitutional and statutory requirements, dismissing claims by petitioners that due process was ignored.

According to the PS, the government conducted extensive public participation, including:

• Household surveys
• Key informant interviews
• Public barazas across Kibra Lots 1–5 in Mugumo-ini Ward, Lang’ata Constituency

Initial consultations held at Ngei Primary School were reportedly disrupted by fears of forced evictions, prompting authorities to shift engagements directly to project sites to ensure inclusivity.

“The barazas provided stakeholders with adequate opportunity to present their views, seek clarifications, and contribute to the planning process,” Hinga stated in court documents.

No Forced Evictions, Government Assures

Hinga emphasized that no residents would be forcibly displaced, adding that housing allocation would be handled transparently through the Boma Yangu platform.

He also highlighted employment opportunities for local youth as part of the project’s social and economic benefits.

Environmental Approval Secured

Addressing environmental concerns, Hinga revealed that an Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) report was submitted to the National Environment Management Authority on September 21, 2025.

The authority later issued an Environmental Impact Assessment licence on December 16, 2025, clearing the project to proceed under specific regulatory safeguards.

Safety Clearance from Key Agencies

The PS further noted that consultations with aviation and security agencies—including authorities linked to Wilson Airport and Kenya Defence Forces—confirmed that the project meets all safety and security requirements, with no objections raised.

Land Use and Legal Concerns

Responding to claims that the development encroaches on road or rail reserves, Hinga maintained that the land was lawfully allocated for residential use under existing government planning frameworks.

He warned that continued suspension of the project under conservatory court orders could trigger:

• Financial losses
• Contract terminations
• Legal disputes
• Safety risks at the idle construction site

Call to Lift Court Orders

Hinga urged the court to adopt a balanced approach, allowing the project to proceed while addressing any procedural concerns, citing principles of proportionality and public interest.

“The petition lacks merit, and continued delay undermines the State’s constitutional mandate to provide accessible and adequate housing,” he said, calling for the case to be dismissed with costs.