Mrima Hill Deal Pits Mining Ambitions Over Heritage Protection

By Mbungu Harrison

The proposed Sh9.7 trillion Kenya-United States rare earth minerals project at Mrima Hill has evolved into more than a contest over one of Kenya’s richest mineral deposits.

It has become a test of whether the country’s quest to exploit strategic minerals can be reconciled with constitutional safeguards, cultural heritage protection and the rule of law.

At the centre of the dispute is Mrima Hill, a site that enjoys dual protection. It is a gazetted National Monument under the National Museums of Kenya and hosts the sacred Kaya forests, revered by the Mijikenda and Digo communities as ancestral shrines where generations have conducted religious rites and preserved their cultural heritage.

The legal questions are equally weighty. Section 7 of the Mining Act bars prospecting and mining on national monuments unless the law is complied with and the necessary approvals obtained.

The petition before the High Court therefore raises fundamental questions about whether a project of such magnitude can proceed without complying with legal protections governing heritage sites, parliamentary oversight and public participation.

For the Mijikenda elders, however, the dispute goes beyond statutory law. They insist that any activity at Mrima Hill must begin with traditional rituals that recognise the sacred status of the Kaya before any development is undertaken.

“We want whoever is involved to come so that we explain our procedures. They must follow our rituals before they do anything, and there must be compensation,” said Kaya Mrima chairman Masoud Suleiman.

The elders say they were excluded from consultations despite constitutional provisions requiring public participation in decisions affecting cultural heritage and community interests.”There is a ritual that must be performed, and it is expensive. Our traditions must be respected,”he added.

Traditional healers have also raised concerns that mining could destroy indigenous medicinal plants found only within the forest ecosystem.

“Many indigenous trees will be lost. As herbalists we will suffer because some medicinal plants are only found here. We want the government to explain where we will obtain these medicines once the forest is destroyed,” said Ali Suleiman Ali, national chairman of traditional healers and herbalists.

The dispute illustrates the competing national interests at stake. Rare earth minerals found at Mrima Hill are classified as critical minerals because they are essential in the manufacture of electric vehicles, renewable energy technologies, defence equipment and aerospace systems. The government views the deposits as a strategic economic resource capable of attracting billions of shillings in investment.

Critics, however, argue that economic interests cannot override constitutional protections for heritage, the environment and community rights.

The constitutional petition, filed by the Centre for Litigation Trust (CLT), argues that the national government negotiated the proposed Kenya-US minerals agreement without involving Parliament, the Kwale County Government and affected communities.

According to the petitioner, Article 71 of the Constitution requires parliamentary approval of certain agreements involving the exploitation of natural resources. The petition further argues that communities living around Mrima Hill were excluded from negotiations over one of the country’s most valuable mineral deposits.

The petitioner is also seeking disclosure of the full Kenya-US agreement, saying its contents remain undisclosed despite President William Ruto announcing during the G7 Summit in France that Kenya had reached a preliminary agreement with the United States on the commercialisation of the rare earth deposits.

Mining Cabinet Secretary Hassan Joho and the Attorney-General have been named as respondents, while the Kwale County Government, Kenya Forest Service and the National Museums of Kenya are listed as interested parties.

The High Court, however, has yet to delve into those constitutional questions after the Attorney-General challenged its jurisdiction to hear the case.

Justice W.F. Andayi declined to issue conservatory orders sought by the Centre for Litigation Trust to suspend implementation of the project, saying the preliminary objection on jurisdiction must first be determined before the court can consider the substantive issues.

“The AG has raised a preliminary objection and that has to be heard first,” Justice Andayi ruled.

The judge directed that the matter be mentioned on September 16, 2026, for directions on the jurisdictional objection.

“I was requesting conservatory orders, but the court said that since an issue of jurisdiction had been raised, it would determine that first,” CLT lawyer Nicholas M. Kamwendwa said after the virtual proceedings.

Kamwendwa criticised the government’s objection, arguing that it had delayed determination of urgent constitutional questions surrounding one of the country’s largest proposed mining investments.

“The government is putting hurdles to the hearing of the case. Through the Attorney-General, it has raised an objection that the court has no jurisdiction. The court must now determine that issue before hearing the merits of the petition,” he said.

The Centre for Litigation Trust wants the court to declare that the government violated constitutional requirements on public participation, compel disclosure of the Kenya-US minerals agreement, and direct that the Kwale County Government and local communities be included in negotiations and benefit-sharing.

Community leaders maintain they are not opposed to development but want guarantees that sacred sites will be protected, landowners fairly compensated and local residents assured of meaningful benefits from the project.

“Whenever the government brings in an investor, we want to know the compensation plan and how farmers will benefit. There are many competing interests, but the government has not adequately engaged us,” said Justice Mwero, chairman of the Mrima Farmers Community-Based Organisation.

The outcome of the case is expected to determine more than the future of the proposed mining project. It is likely to set an important precedent on how Kenya balances the exploitation of strategic minerals with constitutional obligations to protect cultural heritage, environmental resources and the rights of local communities.