A Human Rights Defender's Perspective

The ICC has been on a back foot lately. Accusations of bias hammered at every forum attended by African leaders on the continent and abroad, and writings and opinion pieces by African and other international scholars have been a la mode ! Lecture halls and public rallies’ podiums in Kenya and other parts of the continent have been reduced to a castigation of the ICC as neo-colonial and overtly biased. The discussions and counter discussions which are unlikely to end soon have been tied in with the general declared war against afro-pessimism and a call for African renaissance that has taken center stage giving it a fair share of talk time. This coupled with the apparent fumbling characterized by the manner in which the Court has handled its cases lately most notably the Kenyan Cases – the seemingly unprofessional gathering of evidence, claims of witness coaching and intimidation among other things has greatly muddied the Court’s image even at its most genuine self. These

The African culture is a very welcoming one. Going back ages, Africans are known to be best at offering a shoulder to their neighbors in times of adversity. In Kenya for example, foreign nationals tend to feel comfortable fast and assimilate more easily than when Africans relocate or even visit Europe or the Americas. It is therefore no surprise that Kenya hosts one of the largest refugee camps in the world. It is not just about our proximity to conflict prone countries or the economic advantages we are likely to get as development partners come in to assist with the issues, but more importantly an appreciation of the importance of protecting the dignity of these neighbors in their greatest hour of need – a concept that sadly immediately disappears once a conflict breaks out. Neighborliness aside, the willingness to host gives birth to certain obligations internationally recognized and respected. The fact that the Kenyan Parliament saw if fit to make legislation in the form of

YouTube Video Recording of the Play 'Shackeles of Doom' Courtesy of WTV There was a huge uproar in support of and keelhauling the 'controversial' play by Butere Girls high School. The period during which the issue came up is quite significant. It was the 'let us keep the peace and move on' period. A period when any utterances questioning, dissenting or raising concern about things going wrong was immediately categorized as hate speech and gagged. A period Gathara's World refers to as the return of the 'Republic of Fear' . What got me even more exasperated was the castigation of the Media house that first aired the story, a condemnation of both the school and the playwright, and the apparent uniformed support for the Kenya National Drama Festival's unprocedural, unconstitutional and in my opinion cowardly decision to ban the play on the basis that it would "put national cohesion and integration in danger."  Petition 192 of 201

Inter-American Court of Human Rights Case of Claude-Reyes et al. v. Chile , Judgment of September 19, 2006 ( http://www.corteidh.or.cr/docs/casos/articulos/seriec_151_ing.pdf ) Par. 91 - The restrictions imposed must be necessary in a democratic society; consequently, they must be intended to satisfy a compelling public interest. If there are various options to achieve this objective, that which least restricts the right protected must be selected. In other words, the restriction must be proportionate to the interest that justifies it and must be appropriate for accomplishing this legitimate purpose, interfering as little as possible with the effective exercise of the right. Par. 92 - The Court observes that in a democratic society, it is essential that the State authorities are governed by the principle of maximum disclosure, which establishes the presumption that all information is accessible, subject to a limited system of exceptions. European Court of Human Rights

The Supreme Court finally proclaimed a resounding and unanimous approval for the conduct and management of the March 4 general elections by the IEBC on Friday. By declining to grant any of the prayers – especially those of the First Petitioner, the Court shouted out its confidence in the IEBC. For those of us interested in the jurisprudential value of the decision, we await to scrutinize the ratio decidendi of the decision. A few things are of importance and certainly need to be mentioned here;     The case was meant to give direction not only for the petitioners and the country on what constitutes    a free and fair election, but further, considering the attention the case had grabbed in the region and the continent (Ghana & Malawi etc.), this case would potentially create jurisprudence of a high enough quality to change the conduct and management of elections on a continent constantly struggling and grappling with election disputes.     Since the promulgation of th

The elections (at least the voting part of it) may now be over, and it is such a relief to see people (at least the ‘common Wanjiku’) back to work, back to their daily hustles, awakened to the challenges of life and a realization that political process are in many ways a gamble – a process where upon lending your overt support (almost to the point of antagonizing your very important shop keeper who faithfully sorts you our when the month hits a “bad corner”) they now sit back and PRAY that; one, whoever they voted for will actually deliver on their undertakings and pledges, and two which is even more important, your shopkeeper will quickly forget all the bashing you gave him and happily sort you out again. Many countries the world over grapple with governments keen on using their power to curtail media freedom or using their influence to control what the public can have access to in terms of public information. Thanks to a vibrant civil society such cases are on a decline and

Addressing one of the greatest challenges of access to the Court, Rwanda recently pledged a declaration, known as the Banjul Commission, and individuals, as it is required under Article 5 (3) and Article 34 (6) of the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights. Article 34(6) of the Protocol restricts access to the Court by NGOs and Individuals as allowed in Article 5 (3) to only those state parties that have made the declaration. Rwanda has with this declaration authorized individuals and NGOs to directly take their petitions involving Rwanda before the Court in Arusha, subject to the reservation that all local remedies would have been exhausted before the competent organs and jurisdictions of the Republic of Rwanda. It is high time that member states followed suit by leading and supporting the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms from the front! My take _

Well there has been a lot of castigation of the civil society for constantly going to court raising all manner of constitutional issues, which in the view of those who castigate, is a sign of idleness and that these organisations have no interest of the Kenyan people at heart.  As the inordinately long tallying exercise went on, and the tensions that arose out of suspicions of a failure of the systems meant to guarantee a relay of results real-time, a group went to court and filed a Petition 152 of 2013.  The crux of the petition filed by AFRICOG with an affidavit sworn by Gladwell  Otieno - a well-known activist for rule of law and good governance - sought a halt to the manual tallying process allegedly done without verification of the actual constituency based results, to resume the use of the electronic tallying system, to allow unfettered assess to the tallying process by agents and accredited observers etc.  In justification of the reason for not going to the Supreme

A friend recently commented on and listed the names of prominent personalities who had been nominated by their political parties as nominated senators and members of parliament. His post read as follows: " For the love of my beloved country... The constitution clearly states that the nomination slots to the National assembly, the senate and the county assembly should be a reserve of the special interest groups - People with disabilities, youth, ethnic minorities and the marginalized. Looking at some of the names presented by the political parties for the same, one asks what interests do the following people represent? Beth Mugo (Uhuru's cousin), Sakaja (TNA chair), Dr. Oburu (Raila's brother), Mudavadi (UDF presidential candidate), Kioni (UDF running mate), Bishop Wajiru (ODM Senator candidate), Janet Ong'era (ODM executive director), Dr. Sally Kosgei (ODM parliamentary candidate), Violet Chesang (Ruto's sister in law), Leah Naikanae (Ole Kaparo's daug