African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights v. Republic of Kenya
African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights
Application No. 006/2012 (2017)
- Written by Jamie Milne, JD
Facts
The Ogieks were a hunter-gatherer tribe that occupied portions of the Mau Forest in Kenya, living and making their livelihoods there as their ancestors had done. The Kenyan government (defendant) started forcibly evicting the Ogieks from the Mau Forest. Nongovernment organizations helped the Ogieks file a complaint against the Kenyan government with the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (commission) (plaintiff). The complaint alleged violations of various rights belonging to indigenous populations under the African Charter of Human and Peoples’ Rights, including the right to property. The commission referred the case to the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights. The government argued that the Ogieks were not an indigenous population because they were not a distinct ethnic group but instead a mixture of ethnic communities. Alternatively, the government argued that it had not violated the Ogieks’ property right because their removal from the Mau Forest was in the public interest to preserve the natural ecosystem. However, the nongovernment organizations had provided evidence that environmental degradation in the Mau Forest was primarily attributable to other groups entering the area and the government excising land to allow for settlement and logging concessions. The court considered the parties’ arguments.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 919,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,300 briefs, keyed to 1,000 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

