According to the Applicant, given their special relationship with and dependence on land for their livelihood , when indig enous populations are forcefully evicted from their ancestral land , they become exposed to conditions affecting their decent way of life. 148 . The Applicant argues that , similar to other hunter-gatherer communities, the Ogieks relied on their ancestral land in the Mau Forest to support their livelihood , their specific way of life and their very existence. The App licant contends further that the Ogieks ' ancestral land in the Mau Forest provided them with , a constant supply of food , in the form of game and honey , she lter, traditional medicines and an area for cultural ritua ls and religious ceremonies and social organisation. The Applicant argues that , the Respondent acknowledges this intimate relationship that the Ogieks hav e with their ancestral land . 149. The App licant submits therefore that the Respondent's remova l of the Ogieks from their ancestral and cu ltural home , and subsequent limiting access to these lands , threatens to destroy the community ' s way of life and that their hunter-gatherer livelihood has been severely affected by relegation to unsuitable lands. According to the App licant , their forced ev iction means that the Ogieks no longer have a decent survival and consequently , their right to life under Article 4 of the Charter is imperi lled . Respondent's Submission 150. The Respondent submits important for al l Kenyans, that th e Mau Forest Complex is and the government is ent itl ed to develop it for the benefit of all citizens . While the government engages in economic activity for the benefit of all Kenyans in areas where indigenous people li ve, the Respondent indicates that dec is ion in Yak y e Ax a Indigenous Community v Paraguay Judgment of 17 June 2005 (Merits, Reparations and Costs) Ser C No 125 paragraphs 160 to 163. 44 L.L )