Commission should stop sideshows and fulfil its duty of managing public land

As Parliament on Tuesday started debate on the proposed amendments to the land laws, the National Land Commission (NLC) admitted that it had given its input on the Bills but could not resist the temptation to describe them as “a disaster”.

This is not surprising since it aligns perfectly with the generally jaundiced view NLC has had towards the Land Ministry, a position that also holds true in reverse.

But the general antipathy aside, and as the debate in the House continues, the heated conversations around land raise a fundamental question on the effectiveness of the NLC.

During a recent NTV interview between NLC chairman Muhammad Swazuri and lawyer Martin Oloo, an adviser of the ministry in land-related issues, the former made the astonishing claim that since the commission was formed three years ago, the ministry had not allowed it to work.

Quite an extraordinary admission from an independent commission with a wide range of assignments that include managing public land on behalf of the national and county governments. It recommends a national land policy to the national government, advising the national government on a comprehensive programme for the registration of titles and conducting research related to land and the use of natural resources.

Additionally, the commission initiates investigations into present or historical land injustices and recommending appropriate redress.

THE COMMISSION HAS FAILED

It encourages the application of traditional dispute resolution mechanisms in land conflicts, assessing tax on land and premiums on immovable property in any area designated by law.

And monitoring and having oversight responsibilities over land use planning throughout the country.

Dr Swazuri could not even cite a research that the commission has initiated on any of the myriad issues related to land ownership, usage, and tenure.

Compare this to the performance of constitutional bodies such as the Commission on the Implementation of the Constitution and the Commission on Administrative Justice, which have been visible in the areas that they are responsible for, even if one can argue about their level of success.

Judging from the NLC’s obsession with and involvement in matters related to adjudication, surveying, lease renewals, and issuing of title deeds, it is evident that NLC is attracted to the cash-rich side of land transactions.

So much effort and time has gone into this that the commission has completely failed to address the one area that it should be most concerned with: management of public land.

A MAZE OF CONFUSION
In this country, management of public land is a maze of confusion, corruption, and theft. No one has a complete record of public land.

Individual public entities can claim knowledge of what they think they own.

All exist as disparate entities with land that may or may not have been surveyed and titles issued.

The pathetic parody paraded earlier this year during the saga on the grabbed playing field belonging to Lang’ata Road Primary School in Nairobi is symptomatic of the complex challenges around the public land dilemma that the NLC should be desperate to streamline.

If it achieved nothing else when its term of six years lapses, it should bequeath Kenyans with a complete, digitised register of all public land.

Each public institution should have its land identified, surveyed, and a title deed issued.

It is alarming that even after the President has pronounced himself on this matter, as he did after the Lang’ata Road Primary School saga, there is little evidence that the NLC is sufficiently seized of this issue and energised by it.

SIDE-SHOWS
There has been no public pronouncement about how many title deeds it has issued to which public institutions, especially schools.

On the contrary, scores of cases of people encroaching on public land are daily reported.

Police stations, schools, road reserves, and airport authorities are crying out for help, yet the commission, specifically created for that purpose, appears incapable of giving it.

The NLC could strengthen its claim for more authority from the ministry if it apportioned some of its time, energy, and resources to restore coherence in the records and management of public land rather than commit itself almost entirely to distracting side-shows at the Lands Ministry.