~,~•h CWllL"), 6~ttEB Human R,ghIB ou, Human and Peoples' Rights Collective Responsibtlity public interest or the general interest of the community; (iii) whether concerned parties were consulted; and whether (iv) the general conditions of Article 27(2) of the African Charter have been respected . 190. The Commission notes that the Complainants do not dispute the existence of a national law allowing for the encroachment of property, therefore this question does not arise. 191 . Regarding the public interest test, the Commission notes that the Complainants' submissions indicate that the land has been allocated to the resettlement of displaced populations from other areas, the development of geothermal projects, the development of an industrial park in the special economic zone and the construction of a dry port, as well as the allocation of 3,000 hectares to each of leaders of Rwanda, Uganda and South Sudan for the construction of dry ports for their countries. The Commission notes that the public or community interest in the use of the land of the Maasai community of Kedong by the Respondent State seems evident. 192. The Commission notes that the question arises as to whether the allocation of property was made prior to consultation with the interested parties, in this case the concerned community. To this end, the Commission notes that the information available in the file does not detract from the out-of-court settlement that was allegedly signed with two (2) of the complainants before the Kenyan courts. However, the Commission notes that the Complainants representing their communities in this case claim that they were not consulted prior to the signing of the out-of-court settlement agreement. In fact, they say they have tried, unsuccessfully, to annul such agreement. 193. On the other hand, the Commission has no reason to doubt that the Complainants in this Communication were not consulted. It is in this context that the Commission considers that the right of the Complainants to be consulted in advance and to give their consent has not been respected. If the land affected by the agreement reached with two (2) of the fourteen (14) Complainants before the national authorities includes the land claimed by the Complainants in this Communication, the Commission considers that the land has been affected in violation of Article 14 of the African Charter, as the legitimate representatives of the Kedong Maasai in this Communication have not been consulted. 194. Regarding compliance with the conditions of Article 27(2) of the African Charter, namely proportionality, necessity and appropriateness in a democratic society, nondiscrimination or restriction having rendered the right illusory, the Commission notes that the issue does not arise in this case, as the Complainants have not made 41