p.C HJ>1t (.~ f ~ 6~!j,iE,f, ~onm Human and Peoples' Rights Human Rights our Collective Responsibility 119. The Complainants contend that between 2014 and 2019, the government of the Respondent State, acting through the Kenya Electricity Generation Company (KENGEN), and without any consultation with the Maasai in Kedong, expropriated 1,700 acres of Kedong Ranch to establish a Resettlement Area for individuals and families evicted from Olkaria, as part of the development of the Olkaria IV geothermal project. One thousand (1 ,000) people and three hundred and fifty families (350) were relocated to new two-bedroom houses, occupying an area of 0.41 hectares each, on land from the Resettlement Action Plan within Kedong. 120. It is stated in the Affidavit that because the disputed lands are rich in geothermal energies, sand and gold, which has attracted companies such as KenGen and sand sellers. It is further claimed that the Respondent State has systematically deprived the Kedong Maasai community of their rights its and has usurped the claimed land by illegally granting 3 000 hectares to South Sudan and Uganda. 121 . It is further stated in the Affidavit that the Kedong Unlimited Company, like the Muguga Company, are products of the groups linked to the first politicians of the Respondent State who alienated land to their relatives and attorneys as a way to seize indigenous land. The Complainants further contend that the Respondent State took with impunity another thousand acres (1,000) to build the Inland Dry Port Container and other enterprises, which has resulted in more than 22 families of the Maasai comm unity of Kedong being forcibly evicted without consultation or compensation. Alleged violation of right to life 122. For the complainants, the maintenance of a means of subsistence is fundamental for the realization of the right to life. The arbitrary harassment, evictions, and fencing off of the boundaries of Kedong Ranch to restrict access to land and resources by the Kedong Maasai community, perpetrated jointly by the Respondent State and its collaborators, constitute an affront to the right to life of the Kedong Maasai. 123. They note that the applicants rely predominantly on pastoralism. They submit that their cattle represent their most important livelihood. Therefore, the program carried out by Kedong Ranch Company with the acquiescence and support of the Respondent State is making it impossible for the community to make a living from their land, endangering the very survival of the families and the entire grou . ey claim that the genocidal intent of the program implemented by Kedong R ~ • 1 ),.t lliol R ~'f'f9;...,o'° • the Maasai is a continuation of the colonial project articulated by Cha 0 O • ~ ; 8 ~ ~ \\ 4 \ \ ~ \ (', ~~ ~ ~O,S,. "o\ (@ ·.-~~24 1 \_ w . , AU·UA C ~ ~ t f ~ ~ ":,CJ •li'ICAIN~ 0~ <r,,' ~'11E' E1 DES P~\j~''- -~ __ -_ -. __: .r- ,...