In the heart of Voi lies a contested parcel of land measuring approximately 2.6 hectares, which was formally allocated to the National Transport and Safety Authority (NTSA) for the development of a motor vehicle inspection centre.
Today, however, the land is at the centre of a growing dispute involving the Taita Taveta County Government, private interests, and current occupants.
NTSA management has raised alarm over what it describes as “forces unknown” attempting to grab and encroach on the land. Despite multiple appeals, court processes, and interventions by institutions including the National Land Commission (NLC), the matter remains unresolved.
The land in question was originally set aside for public use in 1969. It was first allocated to the Kenya Police Service before being transferred to NTSA for its operational needs. However, over time, squatters have occupied the land, constructed structures, and sought legal protection against eviction.
The dispute is now the subject of an ongoing court case, with the NLC named as a key party. The court has directed the Commission to investigate the competing claims and recommend a resolution within 180 days.
In the meantime, the Taita Taveta County Government has proposed a controversial solution: that NTSA relinquishes the contested land in exchange for an alternative parcel of equivalent size elsewhere.
Amid growing concern, the National Assembly Committee on Public Investment on Governance and Education conducted a fact-finding mission in Voi on April 25, 2026, following NTSA’s appeal.
Led by the committee’s vice chairperson, Boyd Were (Kasipul), members were surprised to learn that NTSA had been offered alternative land located kilometres away from the current inspection centre. Even more puzzling was that the proposed land exceeds six hectares—more than double the size of the original parcel.
This raised critical questions among lawmakers: Why relocate NTSA from prime, already allocated land? What interests are driving the proposed exchange?
The situation is further complicated by findings from the Auditor-General. An audit query for the 2024/2025 financial year flagged inconsistencies in NTSA’s property records.
The Office of the Auditor-General (OAG) noted that while NTSA reported assets worth Sh1.69 billion—including Sh264.7 million in land and buildings—only two out of 15 parcels designated for inspection centres nationwide have valid title deeds. The rest either rely on allotment letters or lack documentation entirely, raising serious concerns about asset security and ownership clarity.
Members of Parliament voiced strong concerns during the site visit.
Central Imenti MP Moses Kirima said, “We thank the OAG for flagging this issue of the disputed NTSA land. We have seen new fences, and my question is: who approved them? How were they put up? Someone must have spent a significant amount to install them.”
He added, “As we were walking, we saw well-placed beacons, which suggests the work of a knowledgeable surveyor.”
Lawmakers also questioned ownership legitimacy. “To prove ownership of this 50-acre parcel, where is the title deed? Ownership of property is anchored on documentation; without it, there is no ownership,” Kirima said.
“And what assurance do you have that once the land is allocated to NTSA, the alleged owners, Vide Multipurpose Cooperative Society, will not move to stop the project once development begins?” he added.
Kilome MP Thaddeus Nzambia emphasized, “Without proper documentation, that is not your property. Make it legally yours first.”
Igembe Central MP Daniel Karitho highlighted inconsistencies, saying, “The land you are showing us today is not the same as what was initially presented to NTSA. That is not fair. The governor must intervene personally to resolve this matter.”
NTSA officials expressed frustration over persistent obstacles in securing the land.
Joel Opere, Deputy Director for Motor Vehicle Inspection, said, “In 2022, we beaconed the land, but the process became difficult. We faced hostility from mobilised groups in the area. A few days later, we filed a case, and it was ruled that the NLC should determine whether to resettle the people.”
He added, “We have been frustrated. Our board has been frustrated. Every time we conduct a search, we find encumbrances. You don’t know whether to proceed. As custodians of public property, we must act with certainty.”
NTSA Legal Officer Ronald Kipkemoi told MPs, “Residents took us to court. The matter was heard and determined, with the directive that the NLC decide on resettlement. The county later advised that, in light of public perception, NTSA should consider relocation to alternative land they identified.”
Taita Taveta County officials defended the proposal to relocate NTSA. Governor Andrew Mwadime confirmed that alternative land had been identified, while Lands CECM Elizabeth Mkongo said, “We have planned the land and are working towards transferring it appropriately. We are engaging all stakeholders to ensure a lawful and transparent process.”
An area MCA supported relocation, citing urban planning concerns. “We urge you to consider moving the facility out of town to help decongest the area and better serve residents,” the MCA said.
However, committee vice chairperson Boyd Were questioned the adequacy of the proposed site, asking, “Is the land sufficient? We already have a stadium and a showground, and now NTSA is to be accommodated there. Is it adequate?”
The National Land Commission emphasized that the resolution must strictly follow legal procedures. Vice-Chairperson Julia Oseko said, “The court directed the Commission to determine the validity of the claims and make recommendations on resettlement within 180 days. That is exactly what we are doing.”
She added that all claims will be assessed before decisions are made on resettlement, compensation, or alternative allocation.
At the core of this dispute is a critical question: Should a public institution lose legally allocated land due to encroachment and unclear interests?
NTSA Director of Corporate Services Jacob Sisey urged both the NLC and county leadership to ensure fairness, proposing that the original land remains with NTSA and that additional land be allocated to support future expansion.
The committee is expected to table a report before the House with full recommendations. The outcome of this case could set a precedent for how public land disputes are handled across the country—and whether institutions like NTSA can operate without fear of losing critical infrastructure to contested claims.