Africa-Press – Kenya. Kenyan courts are set to hear an appeal seeking to suspend the vital minerals agreement signed between Kenya and the United States, amid growing objections regarding the manner in which the agreement was made. Critics argue that it was conducted in secrecy and without consulting local communities or obtaining parliamentary oversight.
The appeal is led by a local organization focused on public interest advocacy, which challenges the agreement concerning the exploitation of mineral resources in the Merima Hill located in Kwale County. This area is rich in rare earth elements and has a special legal and environmental status as it is a protected forest, a national monument, and a sacred site for local Kaya communities.
Merima Hill, which spans approximately 160 hectares, contains significant reserves of rare earth elements and strategic minerals used in aerospace, missile, infrastructure, and oil pipeline industries, making it an economically important site.
However, the exploitation of these resources has sparked widespread controversy, as Kenyan law typically prohibits mining activities within national monuments. This raises legal questions about the agreement, especially in light of the lack of information regarding its terms.
A member of the local advocacy organization stated that the agreement lacks transparency, emphasizing that “no one knows the terms of the contract, an environmental impact assessment has not been published, and there is no information regarding ownership arrangements or profit-sharing mechanisms or the areas that will be affected by the project.” He added that a project impacting an environmentally and culturally significant site should have received parliamentary approval before proceeding.
Objections extend beyond the mining project, reflecting growing concerns about the process of negotiating certain international agreements by the executive branch, including the health cooperation agreement related to the U.S. quarantine center for addressing Ebola outbreaks.
Public policy expert noted that citizens do not oppose the content of these initiatives as much as they object to the negotiation process, pointing out that many agreements are prepared away from public scrutiny, despite the Kenyan constitution guaranteeing citizens’ right to access information.
He added that the lack of transparency has increasingly driven citizens and civil society organizations to resort to the judiciary, aiming to compel the executive branch to respect the constitution and ensure that agreements with national implications are subject to legal and institutional oversight.
