Ndonga Farm not yet available for IDPs despite Ruto's directive
Rift Valley
By
Julius Chepkwony
| Nov 03, 2025
A section of Pipeline IDP camp in Nakuru on August 30, 2023. [File, Standard]
When President William Ruto toured Nakuru County recently, his message to hundreds of internally displaced persons (IDPs) was hopeful; their long wait for resettlement was finally over.
President Ruto promised that the more than 900 families would each receive Sh20,000 from the government as they move to the farm to start life afresh.
The President directed Nakuru Governor Susan Kihika, Nakuru East MP David Gikaria, and local administrators to oversee the process, insisting that only “mischievous court cases” had delayed their resettlement.
READ MORE
Irony of State's borrowing binge amid increased private sector financing
Counterfeiting costs Kenya nearly 9 per cent of GDP, new data shows
Domestic loans now dominate Kenya's Sh12 trillion public debt
Shipowners lobby objects new container cleaning charges at Mombasa port
How Sintmond's bitter fallout with Kengen cost it Sh3bn carbon deal
Oparanya appoints a coffee revival steering committee
Living cost crisis: No respite as families worse off than last year
Vandalism of power facilities hurts growth, Wandayi warns
The President was informed during his tour that the families had been allocated parcels at Ndonga and Kisima farms.
He urged them to prepare to move in, declaring that the courts had finalised the matter.
As the crowd erupted into cheers, few in attendance knew the truth — the 750-acre Ndonga Farm — the land they were being promised, remains entangled in a bitter legal dispute that has dragged on for years.
For the hundreds of families who cheered President Ruto that day, the promise of a new beginning may remain elusive.
Their fate depends not on political goodwill, but on the outcome of a private succession dispute, one that the courts have yet to resolve fully.
But The Standard has established that the President may have been misled as Ndonga Farm in Subukia is still the subject of an active court and not available for resettlement of IDPs.
The dispute traces back to the estate of the late Benjamin Wamanji Njoroge, whose family insists that the farm was irregularly sold to the government.
The State, under the IDPs Resettlement Programme for victims of post-election violence, claims it bought the land from one of Njoroge’s sons, Philip Kamau Njoroge, in 2011.
However, Njoroge’s eight daughters, a sister-in-law, and a niece through lawyer Steve Biko moved to court, arguing that Kamau had no authority to sell the land without their consent.
They stated that they were shocked to learn of the sale through a letter from Rachier and Amollo Advocates, dated August 8, 2011, informing them that their brother had instructed the law firm to sell Ndonga Farm and distribute the proceeds among heirs.
The sisters first filed a constitutional petition at the Environment and Lands Court in Nakuru, claiming the government and their brother had violated their rights.
The case was dismissed in May 2022, but the court allowed them to file a civil suit within six months.
They did so on July 17, 2022, seeking the surrender of the original title deed and the removal of Kamau as the estate’s administrator.
They also named the Attorney General, principal secretaries from the Ministries of Lands and Special Programmes, and Kamau as respondents.
Representing more 250 displaced families, Philip Kuria Njuguna and others were enjoined as interested parties.
They, in turn, objected, asking that Ndonga Farm be excluded from the succession proceedings, arguing that it no longer formed part of the estate.
Justice Joel Ngugi, now a Court of Appeal judge, ruled in January 2023 that the sale was irregular and stripped Kamau of his administrative powers.
He dismissed the IDPs’ application to have the farm excluded from the estate, noting that the Certificate of Confirmation of Grant had already been issued in 1997.
“It is not possible to exclude Ndonga Farm as part of available assets for distribution when the distribution had already occurred,” he ruled.
The government was ordered to surrender the original title deed to the court pending final distribution, a directive that remains unfulfilled.