Maasai Mara land ruling sparks controversy over ownership, conservation

At the core of Kenya’s iconic Maasai Mara, a legal dispute has raged for more than 20 years over a coveted 4,700-acre tract of land known as Olkiombo.

Nestled near Talek, within the expansive Maasai Mara ecosystem in Narok County, this parcel of land has become a focal point of conflict, drawing in the local Maasai community, the Narok County Government, and a powerful member of the influential Ntutu political family.
 The conflict escalated last Friday when the Environment and Land Court (ELC) ruled in favour of Livingston Kunini, the brother of Narok Governor Patrick ole Ntutu, granting him full ownership of the land. Kunini, the son of the late Senior Chief Lerionka ole Ntutu, is also the brother of former Narok Senator Stephen ole Ntutu and Narok North MP Kitilai Ntutu.

="https://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2001306027/n-a">The ruling, handed< down on March 6, 2025, has sent shockwaves through the region, where the land is regarded not just as a prime tourist destination, but also as a vital cornerstone of Maasai cultural heritage and ecological conservation. With its vast savannahs, rich wildlife, and proximity to key tourist sites and facilities, the land has become a battleground for competing interests—from the Maasai community and conservationists to local rights and political power.

The dispute over the 4,000-acre parcel began in 1984 when the defunct County Council of Narok granted Kunini and his company, Ol Kiombo Limited, a 33-year lease to run hospitality services for tourists visiting the Maasai Mara National Reserve.

For nearly a decade, Kunini and his company continued to operate the land under the lease. However, in 1992, the lease was cancelled, and the area was gazetted as a national reserve. Despite this, Kunini moved to court to repossess the land and, in 2005, signed a consent agreement with the county council that allowed him to continue operating on the land.

="https://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2000225123/major-court-battles-sparked-by-land-leases">The county governmen

The county government then escalated the matter to the Supreme Court, contending that the appellate judges had made a mistake by considering irrelevant factors. Through lawyer Tom Ojienda, the county argued that Kunini had irregularly acquired the land’s title, resulting in the alienation of part of the national reserve. The Supreme Court agreed that the question of the constitutionality and legality of the title deed should be determined by the Environment and Land Court (ELC).

In the ELC judgement last week, Kunini argued that the land was part of the Talek adjudication area and had been de-gazetted after an adjudication exercise conducted on June 15, 1997. He stated that after the completion of the adjudication, there was a 60-day window for any party to raise objections, but none were raised. Consequently, his ownership of the land was officially recognised, and he was registered as the absolute owner of the land and issued with a title deed.

The Narok County Government, however, contested this ownership, arguing that the land remained part of the Maasai Mara National Reserve and should not have been alienated for private ownership. The county contended that title deeds should not have been issued for land within the reserve and that the land should have remained public trust land.

Justice Charles Mbogo, who delivered the judgement, concluded that the county government had failed to challenge the adjudication process or raise any objections during the prescribed 60-day period. He stated that the county government had ample opportunity to file an objection but had chosen not to act.

“The county government was aware of the adjudication process in the Talek area and should have taken necessary action to file an objection against it,” Justice Mbogo said in his ruling.

The court further ordered the county government to pay back all revenues and fees collected from the land over the past 27 years to Kunini, along with interest, amounting to billions of shillings. It also barred the county government from collecting any future rents, royalties, or fees from the disputed land.

The ruling has sparked strong reactions across the region, especially from the Maasai community, which views the land as part of their ancestral heritage and essential to their cultural and ecological identity. They argue that the land was set aside by their forefathers for conservation, with the belief that it should benefit them through wildlife conservation efforts, and it’s held in trust by the county government of Narok that collects revenue on behalf of the community.

="https://www.standardmedia.co.ke/health/rift-valley/article/2001496157/court-ends-40-year-land-dispute-between-maasai-clans">Since the court’s Before the judgement, many Maasai leaders had been calling for the title deed issued to Kunini to be revoked, arguing that the land should remain under public trust and not be privatised. “The Maasai Mara is not just a tourist attraction; it’s our home, it’s our heritage, and it’s where our livelihoods depend. The land belongs to us, and we will not allow it to be taken away. We will use whatever it takes to defend it,” said renowned Maasai land activist Meitamei Ololdapash.

For Governor Ntutu, the case has placed him in a difficult position, as a section of leaders associate the land saga with the Ntutu family in its entirety and not Kunini as a person. As the top political leader in the region, Governor Ntutu has a responsibility to protect the interests of the local Maasai community, yet his family’s involvement in the land dispute has complicated matters.

On Friday, he released a press statement trying to distance the Ntutu family from the controversy. He defended his position, saying his administration had moved to the Supreme Court to appeal the court’s ruling, arguing that the land is adjudicated trust land and should never have been titled to a private individual.

“This land is part of the Maasai Mara, and as the county government, we will not rest until the title deed is reverted,” the governor said.