Early this week, President William Ruto announced that Kenya might withdraw from the East African Court of Justice (EACJ) if the court does not lift the caveat on Mau Forest by December 2024. This move comes in response to the ongoing plight of Kuresoi residents, who, according to Ruto, have been living as squatters due to the court’s restrictions.

The Caveat Controversy

The caveat, intended to control human settlement and protect the Mau Forest, has rendered many Kuresoi residents landless. President Ruto criticized the Arusha-based court for perpetuating this situation, suggesting that the court’s actions have disregarded the rights and wellbeing of Kenyan citizens.

Ultimatum to the EACJ

Ruto emphasized the urgency of the matter, stating, “On the caveat, we agreed we have done phase one which covered almost 10,000 acres, we have lifted it because it was here in Kenya.” He further warned the EACJ, “They have been taking me in circles but I have told them that they have two options: either they lift the caveat or we withdraw membership from that court.”

Read also: Wanaume Wanatuogopa”: Content Creators Yvonne na Bushra Kwa Nini Wako Single

If the issue remains unresolved by the end of the year, Ruto has promised to initiate Kenya’s withdrawal from the EACJ, a decision he justified by the adverse impact on Kuresoi residents. “It is not acceptable that citizens are living as squatters because of no act of their fault and because there is a court that does not respect the rights of other people,” he defended.

Commitment to the Rule of Law?

Ruto’s stance has sparked debate about his commitment to the rule of law. While he asserts that his threat to withdraw from the EACJ should not be seen as a rejection of legal principles, his critics argue that circumventing judicial decisions undermines the very foundations of the rule of law.

The President, however, maintained that his primary concern is the welfare of Kenyan citizens. He pointed out that the caveat was originally intended to manage population growth and environmental sustainability in the region but has instead caused undue hardship for many residents.

Broader Implications

The potential withdrawal from the EACJ could have significant repercussions for Kenya’s standing in the East African Community (EAC) and its relations with neighboring countries. It raises questions about the balance between national sovereignty and regional judicial oversight, as well as the effectiveness of international courts in addressing local issues.