Nairobi Woodley residents accuse county of disregarding court orders in eviction dispute
Written on
Residents of Nairobi's Woodley estate have challenged Governor Johnson Sakaja's evictions, saying the county has reduced a legal dispute over rent arrears, property rights and court orders to a question of unpaid rent.
Woodley residents have challenged Nairobi Governor Johnson Sakaja's evictions in the estate, accusing the county government of reducing a long-running legal dispute to a question of rent arrears while failing to address court orders issued over the matter, the Standard reports.
The Woodley Development Initiative (WDI), through its chairman Sam Gachago, said the dispute was not simply about tenants failing to pay rent but concerned due process, disputed rent accounts, property rights and alleged non-compliance with court orders. "Woodley is not a story about entitled tenants. It is a test of the rule of law," Gachago said at a media briefing on September 6, responding to remarks attributed to Sakaja and published in local dailies on September 3.
WDI said the High Court had issued orders concerning affected tenants and their property, including directions for the county government to resettle some residents and return household goods removed during the evictions. Gachago cited concerns previously recorded by the Nairobi City County Assembly that evictions had allegedly been carried out despite an injunctive order issued on June 4, 2025 restraining further evictions.
The residents are demanding that the county account for what happened to affected tenants, their household property and the houses after the evictions, and have questioned reports that some houses may subsequently have been allocated to other people despite court directions concerning restoration of displaced residents.
WDI wants the county to publish tenancy records for the affected houses, individual rent statements, the methodology used to calculate alleged arrears, eviction notices and proof of service, as well as records of compliance with court orders, an inventory of household goods removed and their current status, and details of any subsequent allocations including the beneficiaries and the legal authority under which the houses were allocated.
Gachago said many Woodley residents had lived in the county houses for decades and had sought legal clarification of their tenancy status. WDI clarified that it does not oppose payment of legitimate rent but objects to disputed accounts, arbitrary treatment, unlawful eviction and disregard of court orders. "If the county believes the court orders are wrong, the lawful remedy is to appeal or seek appropriate orders from court, not to disregard them," Gachago said.