Temporary Relief for Marikiti Traders as Court Halts Eviction Order

Commonly known as Marikiti, the Milimani High Court has issued an order halting their planned eviction by the Nairobi City County. The decision, handed down by Judge Bahati Mwamuye, suspends a notice that required the traders to relocate to the Kangundo Road market. This ruling came after the traders, under the Wakulima Market Traders Association, filed a case challenging the county’s directive, which they claimed was issued without proper consultation or a valid explanation.

Court Suspends Eviction Notice

Judge Mwamuye’s order provides immediate relief to the traders, preventing their eviction from the market or any interference with their business operations until the matter is fully resolved in court. The court has scheduled an inter-parties hearing to further deliberate on the matter. In the meantime, the judge directed both the traders and the county representatives to meet on Tuesday to discuss the issue and report back to the court by September 30.

“Pending inter-parties hearing and determination of this application, an order is hereby issued restraining the county from evicting the traders operating within or in the vicinity of Wakulima Market, Nairobi or interfering with their business operations in those areas,” stated Judge Mwamuye in his ruling.

Background of the Case

The dispute arose following a notice issued on September 10 by the Nairobi City County Secretary, which demanded that the traders relocate to the Kangundo Road market immediately. The notice, according to the traders, was sudden and lacked any consultation with the stakeholders, including members of their association. The traders argued that they were not involved in discussions or decision-making processes that would have addressed any issues necessitating their relocation.

In their court filings, the traders claimed that the county’s failure to provide a clear reason for their relocation was a violation of their rights. “The lack of availing a reason to the petitioners amounts to an infringement of the petitioners’ rights,” they argued. The traders emphasized that the eviction notice was not only abrupt but also failed to consider the implications for their livelihoods and businesses, which have been operating in the market for years.

Traders’ Plight and Call for Dialogue

The traders have expressed frustration with the county’s handling of the issue, citing a lack of transparency and communication. Many of the traders depend on the market for their daily income, and the uncertainty surrounding the eviction has caused significant distress. The traders’ association has called for a more collaborative approach to resolve the matter, urging the county to engage with them directly to find a mutually beneficial solution.

The traders also raised concerns about the proposed Kangundo Road market, questioning its readiness and suitability as an alternative location. They argued that the market does not have the necessary infrastructure to accommodate the large number of traders from Marikiti, nor does it provide the same level of accessibility and convenience for their customers.

Next Steps and Awaited Outcomes

The court’s intervention has temporarily halted the eviction, but the future remains uncertain as both parties are expected to engage in discussions to resolve the matter. The upcoming meeting on Tuesday will be crucial in determining whether a consensus can be reached. The outcome of this meeting, along with further court directions set for September 30, will shape the next steps for the traders and their businesses.

The Wakulima Market Traders Association hopes that the court’s involvement will lead to a fair and transparent resolution that respects their rights and considers their concerns. As the situation develops, the traders remain hopeful that they can continue their operations without disruption while the legal proceedings continue.

The case highlights the ongoing challenges faced by traders in Nairobi as they navigate regulatory and administrative hurdles. It underscores the need for dialogue and inclusive decision-making processes that take into account the voices and needs of those directly impacted by such policies.