An Italian Conservationist living in Malindi, Kilifi County has protested against an illegal four storey building being constructed by a Kenyan investor near the beach despite court orders.
Rita Valentini claims she obtained court orders stopping the local investor from building four storeys but he went ahead to begin constructing the fourth storey in a hurry, against the orders issued by Malindi Lands and Environment Court Judge Justice Mwangi Njoroge.
Valentini owns a luxurious home near the beach that faces the Ocean near the Malindi Marine national park and said the four-storey building was a threat to the environment and blocks her and other neighbors from the Ocean view.
Speaking in Malindi, she wondered why her neighbor was disobeying court orders issued on February 5, that clearly stated that status quo of the suit premises should be observed by all parties pending hearing on February 23, 2026.
However, to her surprise the local investor went ahead and began constructing the fourth floor in a hurry to finish despite the court orders.
Valentini moved to Environment and Lands Court early last year, seeking to stop the highrise building and the court issued orders to stop the construction until the petition was heard and determined.
For one year, she said construction works stopped.
However, in November 2025 she said they reached a consent with her neighbor, who was formerly allowed by the Environment and Lands Court to complete three floors only.
The orders issued by Justice Mwangi on November 12, directed the local investor to proceed with construction limited to the ground floor, and second more floors making a total of three floors.
Valentini wondered why the local investor could not follow the laws and was building in a hurry so as to finish.
She said before construction began the developer cut many palm trees that had been existing for decades and moved on to begin building the highrise building, forcing her to move to court.
Valentini said some of the construction materials were falling into her compound from the tall building.
She is currently fearing for her safety as she spends most of the time in Malindi and her family is in Italy.
“The agreement is very clear: they have to stop the building on the third floor meaning three levels only and the court openly gave those orders on November 12 2025,” she said.
She wants the authorities concerned to compel the developer to follow the law and demolish the fourth flow so that the building remains with three floors as directed by the court.
In the petition dated October 18, 2024, she argued that the current development policy and zoning guidelines by the Kilifi County government designated the Casuarina area as a low-density residential area and only allowed the building of villas, townhouses, maisonettes and bungalows in the area and did not allow the development of high rise apartments next to or along Bamboo lane road and the entire Casuarina area.
She also argued that Shadia was constructing the four-storey building on the property without change of user approval from the Kilifi County government and without approvals from the National Construction Authority (NCA), approvals under the Physical Planning Act and an Environmental Impact License from NEMA.
“It is illegal and a danger to both the environment and the public and the structural integrity of such a structure is unknown. The development and construction on the subject property are in breach and in violation of inter alia, Articles 42 and 70 of the constitution 2010,” argued Rita.
Shadia is also accused of felling and cutting down all trees and fauna before and without obtaining legal, regular and procedural approvals from the Kilifi County government and NEMA who are listed as the second and third respondents respectively.
Valentini had prayed for the court to declare that her rights to a clean and healthy environment as guaranteed by article 42 of the constitution had been violated.
She also sought conservatory orders halting the construction by Shadia on parcel no 9643 and another one compelling the respondents jointly and severally to take measures to stop the development.
“The basis of the plaintiff’s claim is that her plot neighbours the 1st respondent’s. The 1st respondent is constructing a three-storey residential apartment block on LR NO 9643 right on the boundary wall next to her plot and being a high-rise building, she is apprehensive that it would infringe on her privacy,” read the petition partly.
In response NEMA confirmed no EIA licence had been issued for the project, and issued a stop order.
The County Government that is a respondent also visited the property and confirmed the project had no approvals and it also issued a stop order, and confirmed to the petitioner that the zoning guidelines for the area the project is located in do not allow construction of high-rise apartments.
