We are deeply saddened and outraged by the cold-blooded killing of two community members in Ramula, Siaya County, on Monday, April 6, 2026, and the continued police harassment and intimidation of residents in the area. These killings arose from a confrontation between community members and police officers deployed in the context of mining activities linked to Shanta Gold.

Shanta Gold Limited has been prospecting in Ramula–Mwibona and the wider Western region for years. Its 2022 declaration of commercially viable gold deposits marked a turning point, triggering fear, deepening divisions, and escalating tensions within the community. Since then, operations have been characterized by opacity, inadequate information, and limited community participation, fueling mistrust and anxiety about the conduct of the project.

Despite these concerns, the company, under the protection of the state, has continued its activities, culminating in the deployment of police force against unarmed residents demanding accountability. The way the company has been engaging and the state protection it has been receiving, begs the question who owns the company and who is behind Shanta Gold in Kenya, that it sort of receives special treatment to advance its impunity at the expense of community rights and rule of law. 

In light of these events, and guided by the Constitution of Kenya and applicable international human rights standards, we pronounce ourselves on the following critical issues:

Excessive Use Of Force And Extrajudicial Killings

From information gathered directly from the ground, the events leading to these deaths are deeply disturbing and unequivocal. Members of the community had organized a peaceful picketing exercise to express long-standing concerns relating to land rights, lack of consent, and the opaque manner in which mining activities are being advanced in the area. This peaceful action was met with force. Instead of de-escalation or engagement, police officers deployed to the area responded with violence, including the use of live ammunition against unarmed civilians. This constitutes a clear and unjustifiable use of excessive force, resulting in the loss of two lives. We state, without reservation, that there can be no justification for the use of lethal force against unarmed citizens exercising their constitutional rights. Such actions point to a pattern of repression that has increasingly characterized the context within which Shanta’s operations are being carried out, where communities are subjected to threats, intimidation, and coercion.

We are equally concerned by attempts by the Officer Commanding Police Division (OCPD) Yala, Mr. Charles Wafula, to misrepresent these events to the public. Any effort to distort facts in the face of such grave violations is unacceptable and serves only to shield those responsible from accountability. We call for full transparency and an immediate, independent investigation into the conduct of the police.

Harassment And Intimidation By Police And State Agencies 

We have received consistent and credible reports of harassment by officers from the Directorate of Criminal Investigations (DCI), including the arrest of a woman alongside her three sons under circumstances described by the community as deeply distressing and inhumane. We are further aware that the cumulative pressure, fear, and sustained harassment associated with these operations contributed to the tragic death of one of the sons by suicide. These actions cannot be dismissed as routine law enforcement. They point to a dangerous and unacceptable trend of weaponizing the state security apparatus against citizens who are legitimately asserting their rights. This represents a grave abuse of power and a direct violation of the constitutional obligation of the state to protect, not persecute, its people.

We are particularly concerned by the disproportionate and unjustified involvement of the Ministry of Interior in what is fundamentally a civilian, regulatory, and governance matter falling under the mandate of the Ministry of Mining and Blue Economy. The securitization of this process is both inappropriate and unlawful.

We have also documented cases of arbitrary arrests and the institution of what appear to be trumped-up and frivolous charges, forcing affected families into severe economic distress, including the sale of livestock to meet punitive cash bail requirements. Such practices are not only oppressive but also amount to a systemic misuse of the criminal justice process to silence dissent.

In this regard, we call out the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP) for its apparent failure to exercise independent and objective prosecutorial discretion. The decision to sustain charges arising from such questionable arrests raises serious concerns about complicity, abuse of process, and the erosion of public trust in the justice system. The ODPP must not allow itself to be used as an instrument to legitimize repression.

Contempt Of Court Orders

Even more alarming is the blatant disregard for the rule of law. We are aware of a valid court order issued by the Siaya Law Courts in ELCLPET/E002/2025, restraining the company from proceeding with processes related to resettlement and compensation. Yet, in open defiance of this order, operations appear to be ongoing, with state agencies failing— or refusing— to enforce the law.

This is not a procedural lapse; it is a direct assault on the authority of the courts and the foundations of constitutional governance. When court orders are ignored with such impunity, it raises grave questions about the integrity of our institutions and whether certain actors are operating above the law.

Disregard For Regulatory Compliance And Due Process

Equally troubling is the manner in which regulatory processes have been handled. The Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) associated with this project did not include a Resettlement Action Plan despite the obvious likelihood of displacement and disruption to livelihoods. This was not a minor omission. It was a fundamental flaw, one that stakeholders raised and formally objected to. Yet, despite these objections, licenses were still issued. Furthermore, Shanta Gold has failed to disclose details of the compensation framework, leaving the community uninformed until recently to the surprise of the community, when the Siaya County Commissioner publicly hinted at the relocation of over 1,200 homesteads and showcased houses being constructed by Shanta in this regard. These circumstances cannot be explained away as an administrative oversight. They point to a deeper failure and corporate capture of the Ministry of Mining and Blue Economy and other regulatory bodies to uphold both the letter and spirit of the Mining Act, 2016, which requires meaningful community engagement, lawful land access processes, informed consent and the protection of community livelihoods and interests.

The conduct we are seeing also stands in direct contradiction to Kenya’s obligations and commitments under international human rights law. Under the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, the State has a duty to protect against human rights abuses, and companies have a responsibility to respect those rights. The principle of Free, Prior and Informed Consent is not a procedural formality. It is a safeguard meant to ensure that communities exercise their free will, are not coerced, misled, or excluded from decisions that fundamentally affect their lives. In Ramula, communities have consistently questioned how consent was obtained, and those concerns have been perpetually ignored.

The Questionable Involvement And/Or Inaction Of State Officers In Shanta Gold’s Affairs

We must also speak plainly about the role of specific public officials. The OCPD in Yala bears command responsibility for the actions of officers under his authority, including the use of lethal force and the subsequent misrepresentation of events. The DCI must answer for the pattern of intimidation and arrests that have been reported. The County Commissioner, who represents the national government at the county level, cannot abdicate his responsibility to protect citizens and instead preside over an environment where fear and coercion prevail. The National Land Commission, constitutionally mandated under Article 67 to safeguard land rights and oversee lawful acquisition processes, has remained conspicuously absent. 

The Role Of The State Department Of Mining In Protecting Community Rights.

We are further concerned by the recent statement issued on 7th April 2026 by the Principal Secretary for Mining signalling the intention to proceed with the issuance of a licence to Shanta Gold in Ikolomani, even as serious human rights concerns remain unresolved in Ramula. The manner in which this position has been advanced is very casual, dismissive, and detached from the gravity of the situation on the ground. It is not only insensitive but also raises fundamental questions about the Ministry’s role and fidelity to its constitutional mandate. 

We are left wondering, at what point does the Ministry of Mining and Blue Economy speak for and protect the interests of affected communities, as required under the Constitution and the Mining Act, 2016? The Ministry cannot be seen to hold brief for an investor while communities continue to raise legitimate concerns around consent, land rights, and ongoing violations that remain unresolved.

We recall that during the Jukwaa la Madini engagement in 2025, community members held a direct meeting with the Principal Secretary at his office, where they presented the challenges they were facing and formally invited him to visit Ramula and engage with them on-site. A commitment was made to that effect. To date, this has not been honoured even in the aftermath of the loss of lives. Instead, the Ministry, through the Principal Secretary, has continued to convene critical engagements in Kisumu, far removed from the affected community. This pattern of engagement raises serious concerns as to whether the processes being undertaken meet the constitutional threshold of meaningful public participation under Article 10 of the Constitution, as well as the requirements under the Mining Act, 2016 regarding the identification and engagement of affected communities. It also raises questions as to why engagements cannot be convened transparently with the actual affected community, rather than selected individuals, or whether these processes are merely procedural exercises designed to legitimise predetermined outcomes.

Looking into it deeply, the contrast is difficult to ignore. While the Ministry has demonstrated the ability to move with urgency in other contexts, its absence in Ramula at such a critical moment raises a fundamental question as to whether all lives are accorded equal weight, or whether the State’s responsiveness is influenced by considerations beyond its constitutional duty. We reiterate that engagement with communities cannot be outsourced to boardrooms and hotels. Where rights, land, and livelihoods are at stake, the law demands that the State meets the people where they are and not the other way around.

The Failure Of County Leadership To Act As The Voice Of The Community

While we acknowledge that mining is not a devolved function under the Constitution, we note with deep concern the continued silence and inaction of the County Government of Siaya, including the Governor, the County Assembly, the Senator, the area Member of Parliament, and the MCA. These leaders were elected to represent and safeguard the interests of the people of Ramula. Their absence at such a critical moment is both conspicuous and unacceptable.

We are particularly concerned by the longstanding position taken by sections of the county leadership in apparent support of the company. The Governor’s recent shift in position raises more questions than confidence. Had there been timely and principled intervention, it is highly unlikely that the situation would have escalated to the point of loss of life. We are further reliably informed that the County Government issued a “no objection” letter to the company, an action that demands urgent clarification and accountability.

The area Member of Parliament and MCA have similarly taken positions aligned with the company, while the Senator’s silence in the face of these grave developments is deeply troubling. This collective failure of leadership has left the community exposed, unheard, and unprotected.

We, in particular, call out the Governor, in his capacity as a Senior Counsel and a leader well versed in constitutional and international human rights law, to rise to this moment and provide principled leadership. Such a position carries a heightened duty to uphold the rule of law, defend the rights of citizens, and speak unequivocally against violations.

The protection of the rights, dignity, and welfare of citizens is not limited to devolved functions—it is a fundamental constitutional obligation binding all leaders. Silence in the face of loss of life, intimidation, and ongoing violations is not neutrality; it is complicity. The people of Ramula are entitled to leadership that is present, accountable, and willing to stand firmly in defence of their rights.

Corporate Responsibility To Respect 

Shanta Gold must take immediate responsibility for the human rights risks and harms arising from its operations in Ramula. Continued operation under conditions marked by violence and death, intimidation, contested consent, and disregard for lawful process places the company in potential breach of both Kenyan law and international standards, including the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. A company cannot claim to be a passive actor where its presence and operations are directly linked to patterns of repression and harm against local communities.

We wish to put Shanta Gold, its financiers, and its commercial partners on notice that we will be pursuing all available avenues for accountability. This includes initiating proceedings before appropriate regional and international human rights mechanisms, including the African human rights system, as well as filing formal complaints under international responsible business conduct frameworks. In parallel, we will be engaging actors across the company’s gold supply chain including refiners, buyers, and financial institutions to ensure that any gold linked to human rights violations in Ramula is subjected to heightened scrutiny and does not enter responsible markets. The events unfolding in Ramula place Shanta Gold at significant legal, reputational, and commercial risk, and we will not hesitate to take further steps to ensure that accountability is not only demanded but enforced.

In light of these accounts, we demand that: –

1. All mining-related activities by Shanta Gold in Ramula and across the Nyanza region must be immediately suspended until there is full compliance with the law, including the development of a credible Resettlement Action Plan and the conduct of genuine, community-centred consultations in line with Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC). 
2. All officers who discharged live ammunition against peaceful protesters must be immediately identified, investigated, and prosecuted, together with their commanding officers. Command responsibility must be enforced without exception. 
3. The Independent Policing Oversight Authority (IPOA) must undertake a swift, transparent, and public investigation into the killings in Ramula, as well as the broader pattern of policing and use of force in the area. 
4.  The Kenya National Commission on Human Rights must urgently initiate independent investigations, document violations, and pursue appropriate accountability and redress for affected communities. 
5. The County Commissioner, the DCIO Yala, the OCPD Yala, and all officers directly or indirectly implicated must step aside immediately to allow for independent and impartial investigations. 
6. The Ministry of Mining must publicly disclose the legal and procedural basis upon which licenses were issued, and operations allowed to proceed despite clear objections, legal concerns, and procedural irregularities. 
7.  The National Land Commission must urgently intervene to assess the legality of land acquisition processes, safeguard community land rights, and halt any actions that may lead to unlawful displacement. 
8. The Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP) must be held accountable for the institution and continuation of punitive and frivolous charges against protesters. The use of the criminal justice system to intimidate, harass, and silence citizens is an abuse of prosecutorial power and must cease immediately. 
9.  We raise serious concerns over the growing evidence of political capture and elite interests within the extractive sector. There are credible indications that some entities operating under the guise of foreign investment may in fact be linked to local political and economic actors. If confirmed, this would constitute a grave betrayal of public trust. We will pursue this matter and expose any such networks without fear or favor.of inquiry and expose any such networks without fear or favor.

Conclusion

What is at stake in Ramula is not just a mining project. It is the integrity of our Constitution, the credibility of our institutions, and the value we place on human life. We will not accept a future where communities must choose between silence and death. Justice for the people of Ramula is not optional.It is a constitutional and moral obligation that must be met.

–

Organizations Represented 

1. Hakimadini Coalition Kenya
2. Kenya Human Rights Commission 
3. Kenya National Commission on Human Rights
4. Inuka Kenya Ni SiSi!
5. Twajibike Platform 
6. Community Action for Nature Conservation 
7. Community Initiative Action Group 
8. Independent Medico-Legal Unit (IMLU)
9. Defenders Coalition
10. Usalama Reforms Forum 
11. Transparency International Kenya
12. Catalyste
13. Ramula Community Members
14. Geomine Consulting Group