IDPs should emulate Muteshi’s courage

 SHARE

 BOOKMARKPRINTRATING

By GABRIEL DOLAN
Posted  Friday, July 12   2013 at  18:48

Adrian Muteshi’s determination to repossess his 100-acre farm in Turbo is both inspiring and daring. He and his family must have experienced many doubts, threats and questions during the five-year court battle in Eldoret.

Earlier in the hearing, he declined to accept an out-of-court settlement since there was no guarantee of it including compensation and court expenses. He remained focused and unyielding right up to the final court ruling.

Mr Muteshi expressed reservations about the Sh5 million compensation for the loss of harvest he incurred for five years. The figure appears inadequate and disproportionate to his loss of income, but his decision not to contest it will mean that he can go ahead and return to his home just as soon as Mr Ruto removes his property and livestock.

Mr Ruto has announced his decision to contest the judgment. Should he pursue that line, then he will be obliged to testify since in the recently concluded case, he chose not to defend himself.

Of course, the Deputy President may have been innocently misled into acquiring Mr Muteshi’s property.

Many have lauded the court decision as a further sign of the new independence in the Judiciary, but wondered why Mr Ruto was deemed to have merely trespassed on Mr Muteshi’s property.

It appeared more like an invasion and dispossession. Indeed it is hardly credible that the Deputy President was not aware of the circumstances in which Mr Muteshi was removed from his own shamba.

Of course many further questions will now arise regarding Chapter Six of the Constitution on Integrity and Leadership and the ICC will also be keeping a close eye on events as they unfold. However, beyond this, the Muteshi case raises many questions about property owners in the Rift Valley and elsewhere who are in a similar predicament.

There are hundreds of property owners who were evicted in the post-election violence of 2007-8 and whose land is occupied by others until today.

Many IDPs may have been resettled elsewhere, but the desire and entitlement to return to your own home remains. Both Mr Ruto and Mr Kenyatta promised that the Jubilee coalition would reconcile the Kikuyu and Kalenjin communities. They must now prove that this goes beyond them and that reconciliation includes returning peacefully to your own property.

Some faith-based initiatives that have done exemplary work in this respect. But there are thousands of families still living as displaced and bitter persons all over the country. Despite public perception that it was mainly Kikuyu who were displaced, the truth is that many Kalenjin, Kisii and Luhyas were also evicted from Nakuru, Uasin Gishu, Trans Nzoia and Kericho counties.

Mr Ruto’s name is severely tarnished over the Muteshi case. Yet if he were to launch genuine reconciliation in his own backyard by welcoming back displaced people, then his offence would quickly be absolved.

Mr Muteshi has shown exemplary courage and determination, but it should not be necessary for each victim to resort to the court to acquire justice.

gdolan54@gmail.com