Browse all documents

THE PROPOSED REPEALING OF SECTION 34(2A) OF THE FOREST CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT ACT 2016

Report an error

Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

This factsheet by Natural Justice examines the Forest Conservation and Management (Amendment) Bill, 2021, which proposes to repeal section 34(2A) of the Forest Conservation and Management Act 2016. The proposed change would remove the requirement for the Kenya Forest Service (KFS) to recommend petitions for the variation of public forest boundaries before they are forwarded to the National Assembly.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • The Forest Conservation and Management (Amendment) Bill, 2021 proposes to remove the requirement for Kenya Forest Service (KFS) approval for petitions to vary forest boundaries. Instead, it would mandate the Clerk of the National Assembly or a House Committee to review petitions for compliance with the Act, the Petition to Parliament (Procedure) Act 2021, and National Assembly Standing Orders.
  • Supporters of the amendment, including the Ndaragwa MP, argue that KFS has used its recommendation power to deny opportunities to change boundaries and that the Constitution does not require KFS recommendations as a prerequisite for petitioning Parliament.
  • Opponents and Natural Justice argue that removing KFS from the process could lead to the politicization of forest boundary variations and the removal of critical environmental and human rights safeguards. Specifically, there are concerns that Independent Environmental Impact Assessments and public consultations, which KFS currently oversees via Local Forest Conservation Committees, may no longer be guaranteed.
  • Natural Justice suggests that the administrative failures of KFS should be addressed through new regulations or guidelines on mandate execution and decision challenges, rather than by removing the agency from the petition process.

Cite the original document

APA
Natural Justice (2022). THE PROPOSED REPEALING OF SECTION 34(2A) OF THE FOREST CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT ACT 2016. https://naturaljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Factsheet-on-the-Amendments-to-the-FCM-Act-2016.pdf
Chicago
Natural Justice. THE PROPOSED REPEALING OF SECTION 34(2A) OF THE FOREST CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT ACT 2016. 2022. https://naturaljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Factsheet-on-the-Amendments-to-the-FCM-Act-2016.pdf.
Wikipedia
{{cite report |author=Natural Justice |title=THE PROPOSED REPEALING OF SECTION 34(2A) OF THE FOREST CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT ACT 2016 |date=25 January 2022 |url=https://naturaljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Factsheet-on-the-Amendments-to-the-FCM-Act-2016.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@techreport{naturaljustice2022proposed, author = {{Natural Justice}}, title = {{THE PROPOSED REPEALING OF SECTION 34(2A) OF THE FOREST CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT ACT 2016}}, institution = {Natural Justice}, year = {2022}, month = jan, url = {https://naturaljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Factsheet-on-the-Amendments-to-the-FCM-Act-2016.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated