Ombudsman Charles Dulo during a past event/FILE
The Commission on
Administrative Justice has moved to clarify its role in growing
concerns surrounding the proposed nuclear power project in Siaya,
saying it is handling two separate access-to-information cases while
remaining neutral on whether the project should proceed.
Commission
Chairperson Charles Dulo said the Ombudsman had received complaints
and concerns from community groups questioning access to information,
public participation, land acquisition, environmental safeguards, and
nuclear safety.
In a press statement
issued Tuesday, Dulo said the concerns were raised during a meeting
with representatives of the Friends of Siaya Anti-Nuclear Plant
Interim Coordinating Committee and other community members.
The meeting followed
concerns surrounding a planned “Occupy Kisumu Ombudsman Office”
people’s march.
Dulo said residents
had expressed anxiety over the status, scope, location, and possible
implications of the proposed nuclear project and demanded timely
disclosure of information by relevant public institutions.
“The concerns
presented were broad, but largely centred on access to information
and meaningful public participation; the potential acquisition of
land, valuation, compensation, resettlement and protection of
livelihoods,” Dulo said.
“They also raised
concerns about environmental and social safeguards, including
potential impacts on the Lake Victoria Basin, and nuclear safety,
emergency preparedness and radioactive waste management.”
However, the
Ombudsman cautioned that the allegations presented by the community
had not been established.
“I wish to
emphasise that these are concerns and allegations presented to the
Commission by the representatives and no finding has been made on
their veracity,” Dulo said.
“Where specific
complaints are brought before us, we will examine the facts and
evidence and determine whether the matters fall within our
constitutional and statutory mandate.”
The Commission is
currently dealing with two separate Access to Information matters
related to the proposed project.
The first involves
the Friends of Siaya Anti-Nuclear Plant Interim Coordinating
Committee and the Nuclear Power and Energy Agency (NuPEA).
According to Dulo,
FSANP lodged an application for review with the Commission on August
24 after receiving a consolidated response from NuPEA regarding an
earlier request for information on the proposed Siaya Nuclear Energy
Project.
The group had sought
information covering site selection, technical and feasibility
studies, environmental and social assessments, land acquisition,
resettlement, livelihoods, nuclear safety, radioactive waste
management, public participation, financing and procurement.
NuPEA responded to
the request on August 20, addressing several issues and providing
access to a repository containing some of the requested documents.
However, FSANP
subsequently complained that some information had not been provided
and requested additional disclosure and the transfer of some requests
to other relevant public institutions.
Among the documents
sought are the Strategic Environmental Assessment Report, review
comments by the Netherlands Commission for Environmental Assessment
and the KenGen Resettlement and Compensation Framework.
Dulo said the
application was filed within the statutory period and remained under
review.
“As at August 31,
only seven days had elapsed since the application was received. The
matter remains within the statutory review process,” he said.
“A ruling is
currently being prepared.”
The second matter
involves the Western Kenya Social Justice Centres Working Group,
acting on behalf of the Our Energy, Our Voice Campaign, and the
County Government of Siaya.
The group had
requested information from the county government in March concerning
the project’s status, consultations, environmental and technical
studies, risk assessments, emergency preparedness, public
participation, land acquisition and county-level decisions.
After an alleged
failure to receive a response, the matter was referred to the
Commission.
Dulo said the County
Government of Siaya later informed the Commission that it did not
possess correspondence, agreements, reports, studies or other records
relating to the proposed nuclear plant.
“The County
Government further stated that it had not undertaken, commissioned or
received environmental, social, economic, technical or feasibility
studies concerning the proposed project,” he said.
Dulo emphasised that
the two cases were separate and should not be conflated.
He also made it
clear that the Ombudsman was neither supporting nor opposing the
proposed nuclear power project.
“Our role is not
to determine whether Kenya should have a nuclear power plant, whether
Siaya should host one, or whether the technical merits of the project
warrant implementation,” he said.
“Our
responsibility is to ensure that public institutions act lawfully,
fairly, transparently and accountably, and that citizens are able to
exercise their constitutional and statutory rights.”
Dulo urged residents
to continue documenting concerns and submit evidence where they
believe there has been maladministration, unfair administrative
action or denial of access to information.
“Citizens have a
right to ask questions, a right to seek information, a right to
participate and a right to fair administration,” he said.
“Public
institutions have a responsibility to listen, respond and account for
the manner in which they exercise public power.”