‘When Rescuers become Refoulers: Closing Kenya’s Refugee Camps amid Terrorism Threats’ and leaving vulnerable groups out in the cold

Kenya’s counter-terrorism measures, following entry into Somalia, relocated refugees to designated camps. However, by violating a refugee’s freedom of movement, mass relocation contravenes the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR). Regional jurisprudence informed the Kenyan High Court’s Kituo cha Sheria v Attorney General decision holding that mass refugee relocation is indeed refoulement. It necessarily discriminates, punishes disproportionately, and may amount to a ‘failure to protect’ refugees against torture, a crime against humanity. However, the United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees (Refugees Convention) merely prohibits hosts from returning escapees to countries where they are targeted for persecution. Conversely, refugees who are either reasonably regarded as threatening national security or reasonably suspected of serious crimes are deemed to ‘waive’ their non-refoulement right. Nonetheless, the court’s legal moralism insisted that states should prove ‘waiver’ and never torture refugees. Invoking an ‘individual criminality’ principle required proof of a refugee’s dangerousness. Suspects can furthermore not be condemned unheard. Therefore, establishing whether ‘mass waiver’ is possible, is problematic. Are blanket relocation directives justifiable simply because proving ‘reasonable belief’ of refugees committing terror acts or serious crimes are difficult? Although Samow Mumin Mohamed v Cabinet Secretary, Ministry of Interior Security and Co-Ordination condoned mass refugee relocation Refugee Consortium of Kenya v Attorney did not. Curiously, to clarify the ambiguity Kenya National Commission on Human Rights v Attorney Genera elevated the required standard of proof for ‘waiver’ under the Refugees Convention to one of ‘beyond reasonable doubt.’ Previously, in Coalition for Reform and Democracy (CORD) v Republic of Kenya legislative caps on refugee numbers were rejected. Subsequently, a new Refugee Bill (2019) proposes to legalise confining refugees to designated camps. This article applies common-law principles of the duty on rescuers to evaluate whether mass refugee relocation refoules.

Promoting water infrastructure investment to accelerate access to water in Tanzania: A legal analysis

Access to water in Tanzania is reportedly low. However, Tanzania is endowed with plenty of water resources both on the surface and underground. Notably, the uneven occurrence and natural distribution of such water resources limit many communities’ access to water. To guarantee access to water, there is a need to invest in the relevant infrastructures for extraction, treatment and supplying of water from water resources-rich areas to water-scarce areas. Investments in such infrastructures require a sound investment climate, finance, and technological expertise, which seem to be lacking in Tanzania and many other African countries. The absence of a robust legal framework that will cater to the promotion of investment in the water sector seems to be a contributory factor on poor infrastructure in the water sector leading to low access to water. This is because the poor legal framework limits private sector involvement and investment in the water sector due to fear of the risks involved, the lack of awareness of such investment opportunity, and the unclear framework of their participation to name but a few challenges. This article reviews the African regional (African Ministerial Council on Water Declarations) initiative on investment in the water sector and relevant domestic laws on water sector investments. The review reveals that Tanzania’s policy and legal framework is desirous to foster private water infrastructure investment. However, there are legal challenges in respect of the absence of water sector-specific investment incentives, inadequate data on the water sector and investment opportunities, limited human resources, narrow scope of domestic resource mobilisation and overlapping mandate of the established institutions, among others. To guarantee improved access to water Tanzanian water sector laws must address these challenges inhibiting the potential of private sector investment.

The application of Islamic inheritance law in independent and contemporary Kenya: A Muslim’s right to equality and freedom from discrimination

This article argues that the observance of Islamic inheritance law (IIL) by Muslims in Kenya while the rest of the citizens employ a universal inheritance law is legitimate. It is within the Muslims’ right to equality and freedom from discrimination both under the now-repealed 1963 independence Constitution and the present Constitution of Kenya 2010. Through analysis of previous works, cases (local and foreign), statutes, international human rights instruments, international consensus documents, other international agreements, in-depth interviews and focus group discussions, the article justifies the application of IIL in the country. It also conducts a thematic reading of the Qur’an, the Muslim Holy Book and the primary source of Islamic law, to demonstrate that IIL is a matter of exceptional importance to Muslims and therefore deserves accommodation in the Kenyan legal system under the right to equality and freedom from discrimination. The article, therefore, allays fears and misconceptions that the recognition of IIL in the country’s normative structures gives Muslims special treatment, makes them lucky and/or disunites Kenyans. Instead, it shows that such an arrangement is lawful and aligns with the principle of separation of the state and religion. It also makes Kenya inclusive and cohesive as it respects the rights of all its citizens, including the minorities. And because the enjoyment of this right is personal, the article highlights that the hesitance by other minority groups (locally and abroad) to assert it during their countries’ lawmaking or law reform processes does not estop Kenyan Muslims from doing it.

Gains and Losses: The Impact of the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action on the Legal Status of Kenyan Women

The Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action (BDPFA) or ‘the Platform for Action’ (PFA) of 1995 is the landmark blueprint on how the globe intends to achieve a solution to the never-ending debate regarding equality of the sexes. In 1995, women globally gathered at the Chinese capital, Beijing, for the monumental Fourth World Conference on Women. They agreed on the BDPFA, through which they forged an elaborate path towards gender equality and women’s empowerment. From the first wave of feminism in the nineteenth century to the current #MeToo movement, it is apparent that the realisation of gender equality is a marathon and not a sprint. The 2015 Report of the United Nations (UN) Secretary-General on the 20-year review and appraisal of the implementation of the BDPFA irrefutably brings this reality to light. The PFA has seen significant reforms in both laws and regulations in many states aimed at attaining gender equality over the years. However, these reforms do not match the magnitude of the efforts put into the fight to achieve equality; the world is still lagging. In Kenya, there has been a remarkable shift in the laws and regulations providing for gender equality and non-discrimination after the BDPFA. The dawn of the current genderresponsive constitutional dispensation has seen the enactment of several statutes that specifically address issues that have historically perpetuated patriarchy and disempowered women in Kenya. In attempting to implement these laws, the country has unveiled the roots of gender discrimination and highlighted the dangers of disregarding other nuances of this form of inequality such as economic, social, legal, and cultural factors and the intersectional nature of gender imparity. The impact of the BDPFA on the legal status of women in Kenya is evident; the implementation, however, has presented a few challenges as a result of the distinctive difficulties encountered by Kenyan women and the existing Kenyan legal system.

Conflict period sexual violence against women: Promise of the vulnerability theory

Compared to most countries in sub-Saharan Africa, Kenya has, for a long time, enjoyed relative peace. However, this perceived peace has been marked with several incidents of internal clashes exposing women to large-scale gender-based sexual violence. While sexual violence is generally common in peacetime, it is exacerbated in conflict situations such as the post-election violence of 2007–2008 which saw mass incidents of rape and unprecedented killings in Kenya. This happened despite a robust legal framework prohibiting sexual violence. This article shows that the state’s to take cognisance of certain issues uniquely affecting women in Kenya in various aspects and contexts accumulate to disadvantage women, thereby making them more vulnerable. Second, the state’s failure to respond adequately to the unique plight of women during peacetime further exacerbates their suffering during armed conflicts. Thus, in a bid to find a better legal framework to protect women during conflict in Kenya, this article analyses the vulnerability theory of human rights which acknowledges that humans are generally and naturally vulnerable to certain elements. It concludes by stating that only when the vulnerability of women is understood and appreciated, can the law be effectively used to protect women against sexual and gender-based violence in conflict situations, among other hardships that women face, just by virtue of being women. It proposes among others a multidimensional approach including law reform, strict implementation of the existing law, economic inclusion of women and more investment in women as a remedy.

Insecurity and economic marginalisation in Marsabit County

Ten years after the inauguration of the Constitution of Kenya 2010, the communities of Marsabit County are still living on the periphery of society. They remain systemically excluded from the nation’s mainstream social, political, economic, and cultural activities. Communities living within the North Frontier Districts (as it was known then) and within the Counties of Mandera, Wajir, Garissa, Isiolo and Marsabit are still considered ‘hostile tribes’ by the ruling elite since colonialisation and are treated as such. The colonial government enforced this isolation by enacting a series of Ordinances between the years 1901 to 1933 that systemically isolated and marginalised communities from this geographical area. The Ordinances largely criminalised the community’s main economic activity of pastoralism by allowing arbitral seizure and detainment as well as collective punishment for offences of members of the community. This negative and suspicious perception, systemic exclusion by the laws and policies, condensed economic activities limited to pastoralism, political under-representation, poverty, distance and inaccessibility have exacerbated the marginalisation of the communities living within Marsabit to date. Unfortunately, independence did not liberate these communities within the Northern Frontier Districts from systemic exclusion. They were still treated as a ‘special group’ within the context of section 19 of the Kenya Independence Order in Council. This section provides for the modification, qualifications and exceptions of laws and policies to be applied in respect of these communities. The state felt there was a need to subject these communities to screening, profiling, and overregulation in these areas in comparison to the rest of the nation. State institutions were further unable and unwilling to penetrate these areas. The application of different laws to these communities was carried forward during the post-independence where the Presidency was granted the power to govern these communities by decree. Despite the goodwill of the Constitution 2010 to reduce the levels of marginalisation within this county, there is a need to carry out a case study to assess whether the current legal, political, social and economic frameworks have reduced marginalisation within Marsabit which has been for a long time an ungoverned territory.

Reforming the UNSC by the African Union proposal to address inequality: The limitations

The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) has been accused of serving the interests of the victors of World War II rather than the collective interests of the current world. Countries, regions, and academics have all called for UNSC reform. The African Union (AU) argues that the current arrangements of the Council do not reflect the broad membership of the United Nations (UN) and ‘equitable geographical distribution’ provided for under the Charter of the United Nations and calls for equitable representation and involvement as per its proposal. Though the African position enjoys the support of most African countries, some African countries have described it as becoming unreasonable and obstructionist to the reform process. Despite, many scholars and countries questioning the practicality and prospects of the AU position gaining universal acceptance, the AU has not stopped calling for reforms by their position. Based on the realities of Article 108 and the responses the African proposal has received, it is time to compromise, but the compromise must be mutual. Currently, the African position does not seem to have the support of either the P5 or the majority of the other UN members. There is a need to devise a new plan that can get the support of the majority. Since Africa is the only region highly underrepresented in the UNSC, representation for Africa is long overdue. This article concludes that for the African position to gain the support of the other countries, including that of the P5, Africa must compromise but the compromise must be reciprocal. Africa can propose two permanent members with one veto power which will increase the veto holders to six.

The Efficacy of Traditional Dispute Resolution Mechanisms (TDRMS) in Achieving Access to Justice for Marginalised: A Focus on the Kipsigis Community in Kenya

The constitutional recognition of traditional dispute resolution mechanisms (TDRMs) legitimises them as complementary avenues to access to justice in Kenya. However, the lack of clarity regarding the scope of these mechanisms makes it difficult to integrate them with the formal justice systems. An understanding of how the mechanisms work is critical in addressing this lacuna. Using a case study approach, this Article discusses the typology of TDRMs in Kenya, and the disputes involved based on examples from the Kipsigis community. It also outlines the Kipsigis TDRM procedures in both criminal and civil cases. The article also discusses the issue of jurisdiction, various reporting and trial stages, whether there are any appellate bodies, enforcement of awards, compensation, and whether any cases have been referred to courts and vice versa. The purpose of the study is to lay a basis for the analysis of TDRMs from a natural justice perspective with the Kipsigis community as the point of focus. The study found that the Kipsigis TDRMs are considered effective avenues for access to justice for those who lack the means to access courts. The community finds the TDRMs fair as they listen to the parties in an open forum and community members are welcome to participate, unlike judicial processes, which are typically adversarial. Yet, a question arises whether TDRMs, by their nature, meet the principles of natural justice and the rule of law, particularly the threshold set for the protection of the right to a fair trial and equality. This article examines the extent to which the Kipisgis TDRMs blends with the principles of natural justice or procedural fairness, and the rule of law.

An appraisal of HIV and Aids (Anti-Discrimination) Act, 2014 and the tide of employment discrimination in Nigeria

Subjecting employees or applicants to a medical test to determine whether they are fit for employment and so pre-empt any liability that the employer may suffer owing to the unfitness of the employer has become a prevalent practice. However, a trend has developed in terms of which employers subject employees to medical tests to use the outcome as a reason to discriminate against them and terminate their employment. Testing positive for HIV/AIDS is one such outcome where the status of the employee, despite their right to be free from discrimination, has been used to terminate their employment. This is the plight that persons living with HIV/AIDS (PLW HIV/AIDS) must suffer at the hands of employers as they were being discriminated against based on their health status even though it did not affect their ability to discharge their duties. This situation led to discontentment which developed into serious pressure to protect PLW HIV/AIDS. To address the phenomenon, the legislature enacted the HIV and AIDS (Anti-Discrimination) Act 2014. This article adopts the desk-based methodology in appraising the provisions of the Anti-Discrimination Act to determine the extent to which the Act has dealt with the quagmire of employment discrimination against PLW HIV/AIDS in Nigeria. It also considers the challenges confronting the implementation of the Act. The Anti-Discrimination Act has criminalised termination of employment on account of the HIV/AIDS status of an employee and prohibits other forms of discrimination sequel to the status. The article concludes by making vital recommendations on how to implement the Act in a way that strikes a balance between curbing discrimination while promoting the employer’s business.