Nigeria is the largest oil producer in Africa. In the Niger River Delta, offshore oil platforms, drilling rigs, and processing facilities dot the landscape. As a formal colonial vassal state to the British Empire, oil extraction is headed by Shell Oil, which has extracted billions in value from the country.
Nigeria has been called “the world capital of oil pollution.” It is estimated that the Niger Delta has absorbed oil spills equivalent to an Exxon Valdez (~20 million gallons) every single year for more than half a century. The land, air, and water is highly poisoned. Acid rain from gas flaring is a major issues, killing crops, poisoning land, and destroying building. And the revenues from the extraction have accrued almost entirely to Shell and a few hand-picked colonial lackeys.
In the wake of decades of this industrial devastation of the largest wetland in Africa, nonviolent resistance movements arose, led by people such as poet and activist Ken Saro Wiwa. These movements were violently destroyed by the Nigerian state in cooperation with Shell’s private military. Saro Wiwa who was executed by the Nigerian military dictatorship in 1999 on blatantly false charges.
Following this unsuccessful resistance campaign, the people of the Niger River Delta decided to escalate. Some went underground and formed The Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta (MEND) in 2005. Using sabotage, speedboats, and surprise attacks, MEND was at one point able to destroy 40% of the oil export capability of Nigeria, the largest oil exporter in Africa.
You may be thinking, what does this have to do with me?
Regardless of where you live in the world, there is much to learn from MEND. Here in United States, where I write this article on occupied stolen land, the environmental movement has been unable to stop even the growth of oil production. The U.S. is now the leading oil producer globally (14.46 million barrels per day). The environmental movement has failed to stop this, let alone reverse it.
New research released yesterday shows that Shell Oil and other major producers are expected to ramp up oil production by 35% in the next ten years.
Meanwhile, a few hundred poor Nigerian people, with limited training and funds, were able to stop 40% of their nation’s oil production. They did this by acting as a liberation movement and attacking the colonizing force’s ability to maintain war. In other words, they targeted infrastructure.
In 2016, we published an article calling for serious resistance in the form of “ecological special forces”—trained, small units of activists operating clandestinely to sabotage and otherwise stop industrial capitalism, civilization, and empire.
This article will expand on that piece by looking at skills and techniques that serious underground resistance actionists would require to be more effective.
Skills for Serious Resistance
Knowledge of industry operations
To be effective, ecological commandos need to study the industries they are fighting. They need to understand factors such as:
Type of equipment necessary for a given operation
Basics of mechanics
How to identify critical and vulnerable components of heavy machinery and infrastructure
Common security measures taken at industrial sites
Work rotations and scheduling
Basic physics and engineering
To effectively dismantle and/or sabotage larger infrastructure, resisters will need to understand the applied principles of force, mass, momentum, pressure, structural integrity, and so on.
Chemistry
It goes without saying that the ability to use common substances to create demolitions charges is essential for effective underground resistance work. This includes how to access the necessary raw materials without exposing your identity.
Electrical
Knowledge of circuits and timers is essential for clandestine resistance fighters and relatively easy to learn.
Security
This includes digital security (such as the ability to conduct digital research anonymously), operational security, stealth, and social engineering (acting). It should also include knowledge of the forensics and research tools (both physical and digital) used by law enforcement, and a mastery of basic activist security culture.
Physical fitness
There are scenarios in which physical fitness can make-or-break success for resistance groups. Ecological commandos take their health and fitness extremely seriously.
Money
As a ballpark figure, a continental-scale resistance movement might need a budget between $100,000 and $1 million to gather supplies, maintain cover stories, and for basics like food, lodging, and transportation. Funding is critical for ecological commandos. Additionally, they should have secure methods for buying materials (preferably with cash).
Much of the above will depend on networks of support. These networks need to be prepared to maintain an “underground railroad” where no questions are asked. They should also know and use secure/anonymous communications channels, preferably offline.
Editors note: this material is excerpted from a Deep Green Resistance database called “Resistance Profiles,” which explores various movements, their strategies and tactics, and their effectiveness. Image credit: public domain.
Movement for the Emancipation for the Niger Delta (MEND)
Active: 2005 – 2013
Location: Nigeria
Type: Underground Resistance Movement
Success: Medium
Goal
Majority or total control of oil production/revenues in the Niger Delta (for the Ogoni people) and withdrawal of the Nigerian military from the Niger Delta.
Strategy
Totally destroy the capacity of the Nigerian government to export oil in the Niger Delta, force the multinational oil companies to discontinue operations, and likely precipitate a nationwide budgetary and economic crisis.
Tactics
sabotage of oil infrastructure
bombing near military, government or oil industry infrastructure or buildings
theft
guerrilla warfare
kidnapping of foreign oil workers for ransom (MEND has a very good record of returning them unharmed)
MEND uses speed boats in swarm-based maneuvers to quickly attack targets in succession. Multiple highly maneuverable, well trained and armed units have kept the government and Shell’s defensive systems off-balance defending their sprawling networks (1,000 oil wells, 6,000 km of pipeline over 70,000 square miles).
Very effective use of system disruption: targets have been systematically and accurately selected to completely shut down production and delay and/or halt repairs.
Organization
MEND, an umbrella organization, has evolved into a conglomeration of distinct militant groups with constantly shifting alliances and loyalties. Command and control is believed to be hierarchical. Leaders are frequently deposed or replaced by rivals, due to internal conflicts over proceeds from criminal and political activities, and due to Ijaw tradition of choosing tribal leaders on a rotational basis
Above/Underground
Underground cells with a few spokesmen that communicate with the international media
Security
Leaders are always on the move and extremely cautious. They do not take telephone calls personally, knowing that soldiers hunting for them have electronic devices capable of pinpointing mobile phone signals. During raids, fighters wear masks to protect their identity. All communication with the media is conducted using aliases. MEND does not reveal identities of its rank and file and conducts all recruiting clandestinely. The fluid and contradictory organization structure may or may not be by design but is very effective at obscuring the leadership and increasing the operational security of key individuals
Recruitment
Draws its fighters from communities across the delta: ethnic militias in the west and from cults (criminal gangs) in the east
Effectiveness
Has not yet achieved its goal, but its strategy and tactics have been effective, resulting in a cut of more than 28 percent of Nigeria’s oil output from 2006 to 2009. In August 2009, the government offered a 60 day amnesty: militants who handed in their weapons were pardoned for their crimes, given job training and were paid US $410 per month until they found work. But the ceasefire and amnesty ended in December when MEND attacked a Shell/Chevron pipeline amidst questions about President Yar’ Adua’s health and impatience with the slow pace of job growth.
In this episode of Resistance Radio, Derrick Jensen speaks with Helga Vierich.
Helga Vierich did her doctorate at University of Toronto, after three years of living with Bushmen in the Kalahari. Then she was hired as principal anthropological research scientist at a green revolution institute in West Africa. Subsequently she has been teaching at the University of Kentucky and the University of Alberta. Her website is anthroecology.wordpress.com.
The dense Messok Dja rainforest has been home to the Baka Peoples since time immemorial. But now the forest is being closed off to them to make way for a new national park. Although the park hasn’t been formally established, the Baka are being driven from their homes and deprived of their vital lifeline of forest resources—with devastating results.
For nearly a decade, the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) has been working with the Congolese government to set up the Messok Dja National Park with the help of funding bodies like the European Commission (EC), the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP).
During this time, WWF-funded park rangers have actively patrolled the area. The Baka, who are vehemently opposed to the national park, have routinely denounced the rangers, whom they accuse of violence, discrimination and torture.
One Baka woman described how “The wildlife guards just want to kill us. Once, I had just gone to do some dam-fishing. I was coming back with some fish to grill in packages made of leaves, to eat with my husband and children. I’m coming back with the pot of fish, I put it down. Just like that, the ecoguards grab me: Bam, bam, bam. For no reason. I hadn’t provoked them, I didn’t owe them anything. They just beat me and I don’t even know what for.”
Another man reported, “We just suffer these terrible beatings here for nothing. If they see us, they just beat us with machetes. Bam, bam, bam [on your body].”
In the face of such persecution, many Baka have retreated from the forests to live in road-side camps. Already they are being forced to abandon their age-old tradition of “molongo” – going deep into the forest for extended periods to hunt and gather. This is now impossible as one Baka woman explained:
“How can I go into the forest?…I just go round in circles here. At this time of year I gather wild mangos, [but] now I just stay close to the road. I just gather the mangoes that are near here.. that’s their forest – they’ve taken it.”
Confronted with an alien way of life outside of the forest, the Baka face the very real possibility of food scarcity. “We live from the Lipolo forest: wild mangoes, fish, meat, wild honey and yams, everything… but it’s now blocked off and we’re left to suffer. We don’t know how we can live.”
Conservation-related malnutrition among tribal peoples in the Congo is already a well-documented problem. In 2017, a Congolese organization raised concerns that conservation had contributed to the deaths of several dozen Bayaka children during an epidemic in 2016. The deaths were attributed by a medical expert to malaria, pneumonia and dysentery, aggravated by severe malnutrition.
“We’re suffering here. We don’t know how we’re going to survive. There is nowhere for us to live. It’s as though any value we have is gone.”
And of course, when the Baka now fall ill, they are unable to collect the medicinal plants they need from the forest.
To make matters worse, the Baka communities have never given their consent for the national park, with one local Baka chief explaining, “We can’t agree to it. Everything is there: food, life, health all come from that forest. If we were to give up the forest, we’d be sacrificing our children’s lives, our parents’ lives, our own lives. It would be as if someone were committing suicide.”
The Baka remain resolute in their opposition to the project. The forest is not only key to their survival, it lies at the heart of their sense of community and identity. Life outside it is simply inconceivable to them.
“We Baka, we’re not the type of people who just stay in the village. We’re forest people… Our life, our future is out in the forest. For us and for our children. I know the forest from A-Z. Every root, every tree.”
Many Baka communities have written signed letters of complaint which they asked Survival International to forward to the funders of the proposed park. One letter reads, “If the park is established in our forest, it will be very serious. Instead of working with us, the park rangers have made us suffer so much: they beat us, they whip us with their belts. If that carries on, how will our children live? We are told that according to international law, before starting a project in our forest they need to ask our consent. So we ask you to come here, listen to us and see our suffering, and make sure the law is respected.”
The Baka’s understanding of their legal rights is sound: international law indeed dictates that the free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) of local communities must be obtained for major projects undertaken on their land. Without their consent, Messok Dja National Park is illegal.
In spite of this, WWF is pushing ahead with its plans for Messok Dja and the project continues to enjoy the support of the EC and USFWS as major donors. Neither of these funding bodies or the conservation giant show any signs of pulling the millions of dollars they have committed to the project.
The Baka–who are excellent conservationists in their own right–are adamant that this must change, and reproach those funding the project for their lack of financial responsibility: “[We] want those funding the park to take action. We’ve never seen a white person come to see where their money is going.”
Despite the considerable body of evidence of terrible human rights violations committed against the Baka, WWF has thus far denied any allegations of wrongdoing. A recent tweet read: “As if WWF would allow local communities to be systematically abused, that really is too crazy for words!”
“[We] want those funding the park to take action. We’ve never seen a white person come to see where their money is going.”
In an article written last year, a WWF coordinator described how its ranger team in northern Congo was “fully supported by WWF, and therefore well supervised and equipped.” He went on to praise the team for their efforts to stabilize elephant numbers in the region.
The conservation organization insists that it “takes the allegations seriously.” However it has not replied to any of the community complaints submitted via their whistle-blowing mechanism in July last year regarding the Messok Dja project.
The organization says it aims to respond to complaints made within two weeks.
The European Commission has defended its involvement in the conservation initiative, stressing that Messok Dja “ought to contribute to the improvement of the living conditions of the communities around the park as well as upholding conservation objectives.”
The USFWS was made aware of the situation facing the Baka in Messok Dja in November last year. Survival International has no record of any reply.
The case of Messok Dja National Park and the fate of the Baka tribe is far from an isolated case. Survival International has already reported extensively on the conservation-related human rights abuses in the context of the Congo Basin, Africa and India; it is truly a global problem.
The tribal peoples’ rights organization says that up to 14 million people worldwide have been evicted from their lands in the name of conservation. One study even calculated that the number could be as high 136 million people. In India alone, a recent ruling by the Supreme Court means that some 8 million tribal and other forest-dwelling people could be evicted from their forests due to pressure from conservation groups.
It is clear that neither the scope nor the serious nature of conservation-related problems faced by indigenous and tribal peoples worldwide can be overlooked. Survival International says that the Baka now face “existential threat as a hunter-gatherer tribe” as a result of the Messok Dja conservation initiative.
There are reasons for optimism however.
Survival’s conservation campaign continues to gain momentum and with a damning indictment of WWF’s human rights record published this week by the news platform Buzzfeed, the pressure is now very much on the WWF, and the conservation industry at large, to dramatically change the way it operates and respect tribal peoples’ rights.
Ogiek stake claim for the Mau forest after victory at African court
The Ogiek have demanded the return of the Mau forest land to the community.
The community is laying claim to more than 21 forest blocs and the Maasai Mau Trust Land that makes up the Mau Complex saying it is their ancestral land.
The demands were tabled yesterday in Nakuru when representatives of the community met a taskforce on the implementation of the African Court’s ruling on the Ogiek land rights in the Mau forest.
Ogiek steadfast on their unceded forest homeland. Members of the Ogiek community during a meeting when they presented their memorandum on February 6, 2019 to the members of the task force on implementation of the African Court’s decision on the Ogiek community’s land rights in the Mau forest issued against the government of Kenya in 2017. [Photo: Harun Wathari]
In May 2017, the African Court ruled that the Government had infringed on the Ogiek community rights. The Arusha-based court ruled that the Mau had been part of the community’s ancestral land for decades.
The ruling arose from a case filed in 2006, in which the Ogiek complained that Kenya Forest Service (KFS) officials issued them with notices to vacate the forest without factoring in how this would affect their lives.
Follow-up
In a follow up to the ruling, the Ogiek People’s Development Programme Executive Director Daniel Kobei yesterday tabled a 13-point memorandum.
Top on the list of the memoranda is that the Mau forest ownership be returned to the community for safekeeping.
“We wish to remain the custodians of the land and forest. With the help of the Government, we will see to it that all misery and degradation of forested homelands are restored,” said Kobei.
The Ogiek are seeking community land titles which shall not be alienable in future.
“Member households will have rights for house and farm plots in perpetuity but any transfer shall be done to their fellow members of the Ogiek community,” he said.
The community proposed that the habitation within the forest shall be limited to areas agreed upon with the Kenya Forest Service and other agencies and grazing restricted to naturally unforested zones or as advised by the government.
It also wants a sharing agreement for all revenue generated from the Mau and compensation for loss of property, development and freedom to exercise its culture.
MEMORANDUM FROM THE OGIEK COMMUNITY
Presented on 6 th February 2019, Nakuru Town, Kenya
TO:
THE TASKFORCE ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DECISION OF THE AFRICAN COURT ON HUMAN AND PEOPLES’ RIGHTS ISSUED AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT OF KENYA IN RESPECT OF THE RIGHTS OF THE OGIEK COMMUNITY OF MAU AND ENHANCING THE PARTICIPATION OF INDIGENOUS COMMUNITIES IN THE SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF FORESTS
Dr. Robert Kibugi (2nd right) receiving the memorandum from the Ogiek Community in Nakuru on 6. January 2019. Left in red shirt the most steadfast Ogiek defender of many decades Mr. Joseph Towett and 3rd from right Mr. Daniel Kobei. [picture: Pristone Mambili]
Dr. Robert Kibugi – Chairperson
Dr. Sally Kimosop – Vice Chairperson
Ole Kamuaro Olottisatti Nabulu – Member
Malik Aman Abdi – Member
Stephen King’uyu – Member
Esau Oginga Omollo – Member
Cyrus Mutuku Maweu – Member
Eugene N. Lawi – Member
Alfred Mumpasoi Keriolale – Member
Emmanuel Bitta – Member
Belinda Okello – Member
Tom Abuta – Member
IN RESPECT OF THEIR INALIENABLE RIGHTS TO DIGNITY, SURVIVAL, AND WELL BEING
Preamble
Considering that, in accordance with the principles proclaimed in the Charter of the United Nations, recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all, is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace.
Recognizing, the urgent need to respect and promote the inherent rights of Indigenous peoples which derive from their political, economic and social structures and from their cultures, spiritual traditions, histories and philosophies, especially their rights to their lands, territories and resources.(UNDRIP) Article 10 of UNDRIP, Indigenous peoples shall not be forcibly removed from their lands and territories. No relocation shall take place without the free, prior informed consent of the indigenous peoples concerned and after agreement on just and fair compensation, and where possible , with the option of return.
Inspired by the provisions of Article 1.1 of the Declaration of the Rights of Persons belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities; which states that ‘States shall protect the existence and the national or ethnic, cultural, religious, and linguistic identity of minorities within their respective territories shall encourage conditions for the promotion of their identity.
It is our hope that the Taskforce on the implementation of the Decision of the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights issued against the Government of Kenya in Respect of the Rights of the Ogiek Community of Mau Complex and enhancing the participation of indigenous communities in the sustainable management of forests which was appointed by the Cabinet Secretary for Environment and Forestry Vide Gazette Notice No. 11215 of 2018, shall endeavour to take constructive and decisive steps to fulfilling their Terms of Reference, which includes a review of the decision of the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights issued against the Government of Kenya in respect of the rights of the Ogiek Community of Mau and any other judgements issued by domestic courts in relation to the Ogiek Community’s occupation of the Mau Forest.
Further, we call on the government to speed up the implementation by remedying all the violations meted on the Ogiek people as identified by the African Court decisions i.e. the violations of articles 1, 2, 4, 8, 14, 17, 21, and 22 of the African Charter while honouring the decision of the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights which is one of the guiding principle in addressing the land claims of the Ogiek community.
Specifically, through this Task force, we call on the Government of Kenya to recognize of our right to live in the Mau Forest as our ancestral land in accordance with the Constitution of Kenya (Article 63 (2) (d) (ii)), and on conservation conditions to be agreed. The objective is to save our lands, our culture and our forests.
The Ogiek of Mau
We, the undersigned are all members of the Mau Ogiek community of approximately 45,000 members, historically and presently living in and around the Mau Forest Complex in central Rift Valley. We have consulted with the Mau Ogiek people and the submission made here is made of and on behalf of all Mau Ogiek.
We are closely related to our brothers Ogiek living historically and presently on Mount Elgon. They face the same problems of having their lands wrongfully taken as government then made public lands, set aside for so-called forest protection. Our forests have not been protected and our lives have been almost destroyed. We have always known and still know that the key to our survival and contributions as all Kenyans as forest protectors is recognition of our rightful ownership of our forested territories. We welcomed the Constitution of Kenya in 2010 with relief and tears because it provided for this. Government’s failure to deliver on Article 63 (2) (d) (ii) is an abuse of the Constitution and all the human, development, and other modern rights it pledges for all Kenyans.
The Mau Ogiek are concentrated mainly, but not solely, in the following areas:
8. The remainder of the Ogiek people mainly live in the forested areas of Mount Elgon, at Chepkitale.
The Ogiek of Mt. Elgon will make their own submissions to the Task Force as will other indigenous forest peoples: the Sengwer, Yiaku, Watha and Aweer. We have all suffered the same ill-treatment of our land and human rights during the 20 th century.
We have been subjected to numerous violations of our rights to our land and resources stemming from colonial times. We have been displaced, disposed and evicted numerously from our ancestral lands after extensive de-gazettement of our forest land in Mau and elsewhere by the government through protectionist policies with camouflage of conservation that do not recognize our historical claims to forest areas, being our ancestral land. The African Court ruling recognized the Mau as our ancestral lands. Our primary concern is to see this delivered.
Summary of Human and Land Rights issues experienced by the Ogiek
i. Land tenure issues: – Lack of land tenure has made the Ogiek vulnerable to land loss through evictions, dispossession and displacements. The land loss has been occasioned by irregular excision and allocations that took place in the Ogiek land in Mau and are aggravated by perennial evictions. Further, corruption and fake land documents or title deeds have catalyzed dispossessions of Ogiek land through numerous court cases. Illegal titles have become a source of conflict with corruptions draining the community of resources spent in litigation while making the community poorer by day. To end this the entire Ogiek land must be restored to us through revocation and cancellation of all title deeds.
ii. Recognition of the Ogiek Community as a distinct separate people. The Kenyan constitution and the reports from the Ministry of Home Affairs indicate that there are 43 ethnicities in Kenya. Like other hunter gatherer communities in Kenya, the Ogiek are not included in that number. This is contrary to international standards on recognition of indigenous peoples, especially since the Ogiek meet both the objective and subjective criteria of any existing definition. Though the current constitution refers to the Ogiek as a minority community or marginalized group, we are yet to witness meaningful impact of this recognition.
iii. Some laws and policies have criminalized Ogiek culture. Between 1930 and 1935, a Carter Land Commission constituted by the British Colonial government recommended that the Ogiek and other hunter gatherer groups be assimilated into the communities they neighbour. Subsequent wildlife and forest laws outlawed hunting and gathering thus effectively criminalizing the Ogiek hunting and gathering cultures. New laws e.g. the Forest Act 2005 and Forest Conservation and Management Act 2016, do not also cater for the interests of hunter gatherer communities as primary rights holders to their forest lands. The last law does allow for community forests on community land, but first we need recognition that these are our lands. These laws provide only for forest people to register as Community Forest Associations (CFAs) and enter into management agreements with the government before they can be given the right to help Government protect forest lands. This fundamentally denies the inherent existence of communities for who such forests have always been their homes, and makes their continued existence dependent on state recognition. It has further eroded Ogiek traditional rights by introducing user charges, privileging the emergence of competing interests and resulting in massive loss of forest.
iv. Logging and other illegal activities in the Mau forest constitute the biggest threat to Ogiek cultures, religious and livelihoods. The licensed and unlicensed logging activities not only also threaten the biodiversity of the forest but are leading to the rapid drying up of rivers a e.g. Lake Nakuru, Elementaita and Naivasha. The Mara River that sustains the Maasai Mara Game Reserve – one of the Seven Wonders of the World is also threatened. We would not allow logging and other illegal activities if our lands were recognized as our property.
v. Frequent arrests and intimidation of Ogiek leaders and community members is also a major problem. Many Ogiek are facing land related cases in Court in spite of the court rulings that protects them, more specifically those residing in Mariashoni and Ngongongeri (Esingetit). There has been selective and malicious prosecution of Ogiek community. Some of the community members having sentence to life imprisonment due to land related matters.
vi. Fruitless government engagement and consultation with the Ogiek:
The Ogiek have, on numerous occasions, engaged the government in negotiations and approached the Kenyan courts to seek justice. However, for reasons not well known to them, none of their cases have been successful prosecuted and on the rare occasions when decisions have been in their favour, they have not been fully implemented. Besides the legal redress mechanisms, the Ogiek have also engaged the government in abide to resolve land grievances on the following instances:-
a) During 2009/2010 the Hassan Noor led Interim Coordinating Secretariat to the Mau Task Force Report
b) 2014/15 engagement with the Ministry of Environment and Natural resources led by then Permanent secretary in the Ministry Dr.Richard Lesiyampei
c) And recently (2015/16) the engagement with the National Lands Commission led by Prof. M. Swazuri
Worth noting is the several past attempt by the government to address the Ogiek issues through task forces, commissions and committees but which after their term ends there has been no positive change but rather perpetuation of the vice against the Ogiek peoples. Government has been consistently not serious in both recognizing our land rights and seeing this as the best means through which the tragically degraded Mau forests can be saved. It has been advised many times that this is practical and right including by these projects and documents; the Kenya Indigenous Forest Conservation (KIFCON-1991 to 1994), the Njonjo Commission of Inquiry 1999, the Ndung’u Commission 2002, the Truth Justice and Reconciliation Commission 2012, the Mau Task 2009.
We respectfully ask this Task Force to advise Government to end this tragedy, for the sake of our rights and for the sake of forest conservation.
These are our submissions:
1. We demand restitution of our ancestral lands which extend over much of the Rift Valley comprising the 21 Government Forests blocks and the Maasai Mau Trust Land Forest that make up the Mau Complex. These includes lands lost through land grab and other irregular and corrupt schemes e.g. Farms of Ngongongeri, Likia, Teret.
2. We want these forests returned to our ownership and fully accept that this transfer must be made on these conditions:
a. That Ogiek are not ready for commercialization of their rights. As such we remain custodians of our land and forest and would never agree to sell these lands. Our precious forests, also sources of Kenya’s most precious water towers ARE NOT FOR SALE. Our descendants will hold these lands in posterity in the same way as our forefathers did, and as we expect to be formalized today.
b. We will keep these forestlands for time immemorial as forests safeguarding them against encroachment, exploitation and dilapidation.
c. We will, with Government help, see that all the misery and degradation of our forested homelands are restored as far as possible to their former glory. WE WANT OUR HOMELAND BACK AND ITS CONDITION.
d. We want the government to recognize the Ogiek as a people with unique interaction with the nature by recognizing Ogiek special cultural zones and erecting a monument for the Ogiek in Mau forest.
3. We have a strong will to do this and in doing so we safeguard national Kenyan interests in ensuring that the forests are restored to their former condition. We submit that it is of direct importance for us more than for other Kenyans, that the Mau is rehabilitated. This is because forests are the foundation of our livelihood and culture. Our society will die without the forests. We have been fighting against that for many years and no matter what happens, we will keep fighting for our cultural survival.
4. We want Mau returned to us as our communal land. This is how we lived in and kept the forests in good condition, because we were spread out by clans.
5. The resources accruing from the natural resources of Mau shall have benefit sharing arrangement. These would include and not limited to forest products but also the waters of Mau flowing to various parts Kenya.
6. Compensation of the Ogiek for all damages suffered as a result of the violations, including the payment of pecuniary damages to reflect the loss of their property, development and natural resources, the payment of non-pecuniary damages, to include the loss of their freedom to practise their religion and culture, the establishment of a community development fund for the benefit of the Ogiek, the payment of royalties from existing economic activities in the Mau Forest, and ensuring that the Ogiek benefit from any employment opportunities within the Mau;
7. We seek formal entitlements reflecting our ancient territorial arrangements and which are still practical today. We expect entitlement in the form of Community Land Titles. Each territory will be known as Ogiek op Nessuit Community Land, Mariashoni Community Land, Sasimwani Community Land, and so on. This ownership will never be alienable. This may be inscribed on our title deeds.
8. The Constitution of Kenya 2010, recognizes that we are community landholders and that we are eligible for issue of formal title (Article 63 (2) (d) (ii). The Land Act, 2012 protects customary land ownership as equally important as private ownership (section 5). The Community Land Act, 2016 was enacted to enable all communities to identify and secure their lands under titles. We urge all possible action to see the Community Land act 2016 is operationalized including in our regard. This will also mean we can declare Community Forests on our lands (see below).
9. Member households of each community landowner will have rights. They will be issued usufruct entitlements for house and farm plots in perpetuity. They will be permitted to transfer these entitlements to other members of the community or to other Ogiek and outsiders through a procedure that each community will individually decide upon. Ultimate title to these parcels will remain with the community. This is also what the Community Land Act provides for.
10. We want our indigenous knowledge and innovations contributing to conservation of Mau forest biodiversity is recognized and valued. Ogiek are protectors of bees and birds which are pollinators of our crops and plants which contribute to food sovereignty. It is worth noting that the Ogiek community in conjunction with KFS and other stakeholders have rehabilitated over 100 acres of indigenous trees and 25 community scouts have volunteered to protect the forest as show case of our potentiality.
11. Habitation within each zone will be limited to areas which we agree with Kenya Forestry Service or other appropriate agencies. These will include areas that are naturally unforested and lands in and around present Forest Stations. Grazing will be restricted to zones that are naturally unforested (glades and moorlands), again in agreement with our technical adviser, the Kenya Forest Service.
12. Each community will also define Community Forest Reserves. In most cases we believe this will fall into two categories: Community Protected Forests and Community Use Forests. Different rules will apply. In neither case will any habitation or farming be permitted.
13. a) We understand that responsibilities go with rights. We look forward to becoming the rehabilitators and conservators of the Mau Complex in service for the nation. We look forward to working with the Ministry of Environment and all its agencies towards saving the Mau, and saving our society. We need and want their advice to help us do the very best job.
13. b) We make a prayer to the Task Force on the implementation of the decision of the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights issued against the government of Kenya in respect to the Ogiek Community of Mau to address our shared land and forest rights as a priority for action. We acknowledge that it is not practical to return land to all aggrieved people of Kenya. But the case of traditional forest dwellers is straightforward and special. We have been waiting for recognition of our homeland forests for over 100 years. We know that without return of our forestlands, we cannot survive. We also know that without restoration of our land rights the Mau will slowly but surely disappear.
14. We also demand that while all the above is being delivered that we, the rightful owners of the Mau Forests will not be evicted from our homeland.
It’s worthy noting that the Ogiek are an important part of Kenyan history and heritage. Protecting our culture and guaranteeing our survival is an inherent duty of the State. In the face of wrongdoing, as found conclusively by the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights, it is the obligation of the State to take the necessary steps to restore our dignity and worth, and we call upon the Task Force to work to urgently implement this path-breaking judgment.
We wish to implore to the Taskforce to consider Ogiek Peoples Development Program (OPDP) for any form of consultation on behalf the Ogiek Community of Mau, as the case was with ACHPR. It will ease and deter masqueraders from intruding to the Task Force.
This memorandum is an addendum to the judgment of the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights and formal submission we have made to the Court since at is request. This submission is consistent with that submission held by the Court. It does not supersede the wishes of the Ogiek community and the ruling of the Court.
6 th February 2019, Nakuru Town, Kenya
Signed by 71 Ogiek Elders
—
“At the moment we cannot say we have much for public consumption but by May we shall have our report and submit to the CS,” the task force chair Dr. Robert Kibugi said after visiting various forest blocks of the Mau.
The meeting was also attended by Kuresoi South MP Joseph Tonui and nominated Senator Victor Prengei.
The African Union landmark ruling was delivered already on May 26, 2017 and Kenya is in delay to follow the verdict and implement the remedies.
The Court found that the Kenyan government violated various rights of Ogiek by evicting them from their ancestral land in Mau Forest.
The court ordered the Kenyan government to take all appropriate measures within a reasonable time frame to remedy all the violations committed against the Ogiek.
