The petitioners say the works form part of the wider redevelopment associated with the proposed expansion of the Bomas of Kenya complex into an international convention centre and related visitor infrastructure.

They want the Environment and Land Court to suspend the works pending determination of the case and ultimately nullify the approvals authorising the developments.

The petition pits multi-billion-shilling tourism and public infrastructure investment against the protection of the flagship wildlife reserve.

The petitioners, described as Friends of Nairobi National Park, want the court to suspend the works pending determination of the case and ultimately nullify the approvals, arguing the developments unlawfully convert protected park land into commercial and transport infrastructure.

The constitutional petition names the Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS), the National Environment Management Authority (Nema), the Attorney-General, and the Cabinet Secretaries for Tourism and for Roads and Transport as respondents.

The case seeks immediate orders stopping vegetation clearance, tree felling, excavation, fencing, road construction and all related works within the affected section of the park until the dispute is determined.

The petitioners contend the project violates constitutional protections for the environment and disregards statutory safeguards governing Kenya’s oldest national park.

“The respondents have commenced and continue to undertake clearing of indigenous vegetation, felling of trees, excavation, grading, fencing, road construction and other development activities within Nairobi National Park,” the petition states.

“Unless restrained by this court, the respondents will continue with the impugned activities to the detriment of the petitioners and the public.”

According to the court filings, the disputed project comprises the relocation of the Nairobi Animal Orphanage from its current site to a new location inside Nairobi National Park, and the construction of a 1,300-vehicle parking facility occupying about eight acres.

The proposed relocation site for the Nairobi Animal Orphanage is located on the northern boundary of the park along Lang’ata Road.

The project also includes an access road linking the proposed parking facility and the relocated Nairobi Animal Orphanage to the Bomas of Kenya complex, as well as a pedestrian bridge within the protected park.

The petitioners argue that the developments have already involved vegetation clearance, tree felling, excavation, grading and fencing within a section of the park designated as a Low Use Zone under the Nairobi National Park Management Plan 2020–2030.

According to the pleadings, the project would permanently convert land reserved for wildlife conservation into transport, visitor and supporting infrastructure without the approvals and processes required under the Constitution, environmental and wildlife laws.

The petitioners argue the developments were approved without complying with the Constitution, the Wildlife Conservation and Management Act, the Environmental Management and Coordination Act, the Forest Conservation and Management Act and the Nairobi National Park Management Plan 2020-2030.

In his affidavit, James Mudhune, a petitioner, says the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) report contains fundamental contradictions over the project’s scope, stating the new site covers 26 acres, 64 acres and 76.6 acres (31 hectares) in different sections of the report, while KWS has publicly described it as spanning 89 to 90 acres.

He says the report also inconsistently describes the perimeter fence as 700 metres in some sections and about 10 kilometres enclosing roughly 1,500 acres in others, while estimating the project cost at both Sh57.9 million and Sh315.1 million.

Mr Mudhune further says the report alternately proposes parking for 50 buses and 100 cars and a 1,300-vehicle parking facility on about eight acres, arguing the contradictions “go to the fundamental description and scope of the project” and render the EIA report “substantively inadequate and incapable of supporting a valid EIA licence.”

The petitioners further argue the developments threaten wildlife habitats and ecological integrity while changing the designated use of protected land.

“The impugned developments constitute an unlawful conversion of protected conservation land to infrastructure and commercial use,” the petitioners say, adding that the projects are proceeding “without lawful authority, mandatory environmental approvals and meaningful public participation.”

The coalition is asking the court to declare the approvals and all associated decisions unconstitutional, illegal, null and void.

It also wants permanent orders restraining KWS and other respondents from undertaking further construction or permitting additional developments within the disputed area.

In a supporting affidavit, the petitioners argue Nairobi National Park is protected under both Kenyan law and international environmental obligations and should be managed primarily for wildlife conservation.

They say the disputed developments fall within an area designated for low-intensity conservation use under the park’s management plan.

“The continued implementation of the impugned developments will occasion irreversible environmental degradation and loss of protected wildlife habitat,” the affidavit states.

The petitioners also argue that the case raises issues extending beyond the immediate project because it concerns the management of public trust resources and constitutional environmental rights.

“The matters raised herein concern the protection of public land, biodiversity, wildlife habitats and the constitutional right to a clean and healthy environment,” they state.

The court is scheduled to hear the petitioners’ application for conservatory orders on July 14, 2026.