stipulates that gazetted forests are public lands, which therefore makes the Land Act 2012 contradictory. Respondent's Submission 120. The Respondent contends that the Ogieks are not the only tribe indigenous to the Mau Forest and as such, they cannot claim exclusive ownership of the Mau Forest. The Respondent states that the title for all forest in Kenya (including the Mau Forest), other than private and local authority forest is vested in the State. The Respondent avers that since the colonial administration it was communicated to the Ogieks that the Mau Forest was a protected conservation area on which they were encroaching upon and that they were required to move out of the forest . The Respondent also argues that the Ogieks were consulted and notified before every eviction was carried out and that these were carried out in accordance with the law. 121 . The Respondent states that its land laws recognise community ownership of land and provide for mechanisms by which communities can participate in forest conservation and management. The Respondent contends that under its laws , community forest users are granted rights which include collection of medicinal herbs and harvesting of honey among others. The Respondent argues that in any event, the Court should look at the matter from the point of view of proportionality. The Court's Assessment 122. Article 14 of the Charter provides as follows: "The right to property shall be guaranteed. It may only be encroached upon in the interest of public need or in the general interest of the community and in accordance with the provisions of appropriate laws." 35 ~}