In late February 2019, KHRC traveled to Machakos County after receiving reports of multiple counts of child sex abuse at Martyrs of Uganda School in the county. KHRC interviewed one victim of sexual abuse and one parent of a victim of sexual abuse. KHRC also made inquiries with the Machakos County Department of Children's Services (DCS), the investigating officer in the case, and the leadership of Machakos Police Station.

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [503.17 KB]

The Police Reforms Working Group hereby condemn the heinous attack and brutality meted against innocent Kenyans at 14 Riverside Drive on Tuesday, the 14th of January 2019.

We send our sincerest condolences to the families of the victims of Tuesday afternoon’s terrorist attack on 14 Riverside drive including the brave officer who died in the line of duty. We join the families, rest of the country, and indeed the whole world in praying for the quick recovery of the injured and those who suffered traumatic experiences during this attack.

We appreciate the quick response and efforts of the first responders: journalists, police, the Kenya Red Cross and other good Samaritans that supported the efforts to save the lives of our brothers and sisters during the attack. Your bravery and selflessness in that very trying moment cannot be adequately rewarded.

We note of the exemplary job of the National Police Service joint command, led by the IG Boinett and other senior officers, both local and international, in the search and rescue operations. We are aware that the first police officers arrived promptly at the scene. During the whole incident, the officers behaved in a most professional manner, bravely forging forward to engage the terrorists, but also being mindful of the victims and calmly reassuring them to safety.

The clear coordination of efforts confirms that the NPS has learned from the past, and is looking ahead to build coherence and effectiveness in policing. This, is indeed the kind of National Police Service envisaged in the Constitution of Kenya and the National Police Service Act.

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [252.64 KB]

ROUND TABLE BREAKFAST MEETING: 22^ND NOVEMBER, 2018.

THEME: HARNESSING SYNERGY, ACCOUNTABILITY AND EFFECTIVENESS IN TODAYS DYNAMIC POLICING ENVIRONMENT.

Session: CSOS Roles in Collaboration and Cooperation in law Enforcement

Allow us to appreciate this convening which we believe is part of the continuum towards more honest, productive and structured partnerships that have emerged in the recent past in this sector.

Before we make our substantive comments, allow us to reframe the session to read “policing” instead of ‘law enforcement’ for the business before us is beyond law enforcement. The reason being that the way you frame this discussion informs the approach you take. While law enforcement narrows this down to uninformed institutional agency, policing embraces prevention and public and other stakeholder participation.

Law enforcement can be a very effective way to maintain public order and punish crime inasmuch as it is focused on requiring the members of a community or society to comply with the law or face the consequences. The problem of law enforcement alone as a response to crime is that it is singular in its approach, responding to effects without consideration for causes. The problem of law enforcement alone as a response to crime is that it is singular in its approach, responding to effects without consideration for causes.

The term policing has come to mean an approach to crime fighting through community service and problem-solving. The idea of policing requires a holistic approach to community service, taking into account the problems that plague a community and working with the people within that community to solve them. Policing requires cooperation from residents, business owners, and leaders who participate in the process of reducing crime and improving quality of life. While this idea of community policing may sound revolutionary, it actually dates back to the earliest days of the modern police force.

The latter is what Article 244 (e) of the Constitution of Kenya 2010; Section 41-44 and 96-100 of the National Police Service Act (amended 2015)

Having dealt with that we reiterate our appreciation partnership and multi-stakeholder approach taken by the Ministry of Interior since April 2018. This has approach has begun to bear fruits. The development of the National Policing Multi-Stakeholders Consultative Committee Reforms Matrix is among the initial concrete results of this partnership, as is the launch of the policy document on policing housing and coordination on September 13^th 2018.

We also appreciate the new approach by the Inspector General and his top leadership including the county tours to create awareness and champion the envisaged reforms.

We recognize the timely appointment of the new board members of the IPOA and would like to congratulate them for the privilege and honor they have been given to serve in such a sensitive, challenging office, yet one with so much promise for Kenyans.

We will not hesitate to caution the new board members of the following:

1. The high expectations Kenyans have of this second generation board-a board who have found a functioning organization; not hindered by the rigors of establishing one, their only duty is to ensure that the function of police accountability is taken to the next level; they must deliver results so impactful
2. The temptations of public office especially personal aggrandizement and personal glory. The temptation to make themselves full time and how this may affect the relationship with the secretariat and cost to the tax payer. The temptation to seek top of the range comfort and VIP protection!

We call upon the new board to deepen the partnerships so far established with civil society and other intermediaries for victims. For instance we look forward to the appointment of the civil society liaison board member and the signing of MOUs with victim intermediary institutions.

We also look forward the board enhancing feedback mechanism with victim intermediary institutions which is currently either absent or non-functional.

One of the key concerns that continues to erode civil society confidence in this renewed partnership is the issue of police killings. Since April 2018 when this new approach commenced, we have recorded xxxxxxxxxx cases of police killings. In most of these cases the information in our possession indicate that ere was no justifiable reason to use lethal force.  A few examples suffice:

1. Evans Odhiambo- A Grogon-based mechanic who lived in Mathare North
2. Caleb Espino in Mombasa (Changamwe Police Station)
3. David Kariuki in Dandora and his 2 cousins
4. A 17-year old John Njuguna in Mathare North, among others

Two worrying issues about these killings are:

1. The new development where our members have become targets for intimidation and threats on phone and social media for demanding a cessation and accountability for these killings
2. The threat on professionals carrying out medico-legal documentation on instructions from families of the deceased.
3. The often expressed view within the security sector that they have no choice than to execute suspects of crime
4. The fact that despite families, civil society and community members raising complaints about specific officers suspected of involvement in these killings these officers are still in situ in the police station jurisdictions where these killings are happening;
5. The low rates of compliance to the mandatory reporting to IPOA
6. The failure by IPOA to hold to account over the last 5 years, police officers and their superiors who fail to report every case of injury and death resulting from the use of force.

As we continue to engage in this multi-stakeholder approach, it is our opinion as a Working Group that the issue of accountability is the deal breaker! If this is not handled, all other pillars of police reform including enhancing public trust and community policing will remain a mirage.

Lastly we reiterate the need for the National Policing Multi-Stakeholders Consultative Committee to resume operations in a structured and purposively manner in support of the reforms already agreed in the Matrix agreed in September 2018.

We welcome a candid conversation regarding these matters

Police Reforms Working Group-Kenya

November 23^rd, 2018

1. We the Police Reforms Working Group-Kenya (PRWG-K), the Social Justice Centre Working Group (SJCWG) and human rights defenders pass our deepest condolences to police officers and civilians who have been victims of acts of crime in the recent past, and wish the surviving ones quick recovery.
2. We are well aware that Kenyans are increasingly experiencing violent crime. We therefore cannot under any circumstances underestimate the trauma that our society is living through, due to the increase in cases of violent crime, and the apparent inability of the National Police Service to reduce these incidences and, or successfully prosecute these cases.
3. We stand with Kenyans, especially victims of violent crime who are extremely frustrated by the increased number of suspects who continue to roam freely intimidating and threatening victims and witnesses, eliminating witnesses, and in some cases committing new crimes, mainly due to botched investigations and police corruption.
4. However the Police Reforms Working Group- Kenya (PRWG-K) wishes to express grave concern over increasing incidences of deaths from police use of lethal force in the country. Over the past one month, incidences of torture and extrajudicial executions implicating police officers are on an all- time high. This is especially regrettable at a time when the country is embracing the new police reforms initiatives to transform our police force to a civilian-centered police service

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [165.78 KB]

We civil society organisations and National Human Rights Institutions working on all aspects of human and peoples’rights in Africa having met in Banjul, The Gambia under the theme “Defend the ACHPR” on the 23rd of October 2018 to dialogue on our response to the attacks on the independence of the ACHPR do adopt the following declaration:

Aware that the ACHPR has been subject to gradual and escalating threats and attempts to undermine its credibility and independence by individual State parties. These threats have culminated into full blown attacks which are led by autocratic and populist governments African Union member states who do not want to be held accountable for human rights violations that they commit at national level and seek to create a culture of impunity by weakening our accountability mechanisms.

Taking note of Para. 5 of Decision EX.CL/Dec.1008-1030(XXXIII) of the AU Executive Council (Decision 1015) which is a distortion of core principles of international human rights law and an attempt to rewrite the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (African Charter). The paragraph misstates the independence enjoyed by the ACHPR as “functional in nature and not independent from the organs that created it. It purports to limit the independence enjoyed by the ACHPR to ‘functional” independence and to remove its institutional and the commissioners’ personal independence, which are key to an all effective quasi-judicial bodies.

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [192.78 KB]

63^rd Ordinary Session; 24^th October-13^th November 2018

Madam Chairperson, Honourable Commissioners, State Party representatives and distinguished guests;

Since the last session of the ACHPR, a number of significant events have taken place in Kenya and Africa. We would like to bring to your attention human rights and governance issues that are of concern to us, and require the attention of the Commission.

1. Independence of the African Commission on Human and People’s Rights (ACHPR)

The ACHPR has seen steady and swelling threats and attempts to undermine its credibility and independence by individual State parties. Executive council decision 1015 is an attempt to shove the primacy of the African charter as the establishing authority of the ACHPR through distortions.

Cognisant that interference with the mandate of the ACHPR represents a push against human rights and constitutes a violation of the African Charter, and the Constitutive Act of the AU; the Kenya Human Rights Commission urges all the Africa Union Member states to boldly reframe the narrative of the ACHPR and recognise and affirm its role as a monitoring mechanism of the member's states rather than a seemingly rogue organ of the African Union;

We call on the ACHPR to continue steadily to promote and protect the rights of all living on the African continent without discrimination, fear or favour and affirm itself a truly independent institution breathing life to the charter and a hub of accountability for human rights in Africa

1. Independence of judicial mechanisms in Kenya

In Kenya, threats and attacks have been meted on the judiciary through I) a total disregard of court rulings, particularly those that have to do with state and state officers; of importance are a myriad of decisions for the commencement of the Public benefit organisations act of no 18 of 2013 which have been continually ignored ii) unfounded onslaught on judges and iii) heavy and arbitrary budget cuts.  All these measures risk undermining the effectiveness and independence of the judiciary.

We implore the commission to urge  Kenya to cease and desist from interfering with judicial independence and instead ensure thororugh implementation of judicial decisions and provide  adequate funding for the judiciary to allow enhanced access to justice and furtherance of the rule of law in Kenya.

1. Corruption in Kenya

The spate of corruption scandals in Kenya in the recent past has seen unprecedented plunder of public resources leading to a clawing back by the state on service delivery and the realisation of human rights. Large infrastructural projects, popularly touted as “flagship projects”, have been the main conduits through which Kenya has lost colossal amounts of money via corrupt dealings and procurement processes. In an attempt to deliver on his political promises, the president recently ordered the arrest and investigation of persons alleged to be involved in graft. While we applaud the political will on this matter, we continue to reiterate the fact that such actions do not only show an outlier of his delivery but also present the need for Kenya to reflect on implementing the existing policies and legislation to win the fight against corruption.

Given the African Union theme 2018 and the fact that corruption has been a major handicap in the efforts to realise human rights, we call upon the Commission to:

• strongly pronounce itself on the issue of corruption and the duty of member states to deliberately address corruption alongside other key governance issues, pursuant to their obligations to fulfil human rights;
• encourage the Government of Kenya to fully implement and domesticate the AU Convention on Preventing & Combating Corruption for the benefit of Kenya’s development;
• encourage the government to translate the President’s pledge on fighting corruption into a comprehensive and objective process based on citizen participation, the rule of law and our Constitution’s standards on leadership and integrity. The fight against corruption must be shielded against any possible accusations of political bias.

1. Electoral Justice

Electoral  process in Kenya,  has often times been marred by massive irregularities and illegalities. celebrates its victor elites .The process oftentimes fails to respond adequately to the victims of electoral violence thus resulting in an accumulated human rights situation. This has deepened impunity and access to justice in Kenya . Following the setting up of a Truth Justice and Reconciliation Commission (TJRC), victims shared their experiences upon which succinct recommendations were set out. The violations of 2007/8 elections violence are well captured in the post-election report famously known as the Waki report. Disappointingly, Kenya is yet to implement the recommendations laid out by the TJRC and the Waki report. Additionally, the 2013, and most recently 2017 general elections, are a testament that recommendations and reports to the government are often ignored. Instead what we see are reconciliation of  the elites thereby achieving calm without justice.   We reiterate that electoral justice must prevail for the people of Kenya to have meaningful enjoyment of human rights and democracy for all.

We encourage the commission to follow up on the promises made by the Kenyan government for justice for victims of election violence. We continue to call on Kenya to create mechanisms for access to justice for victims of sexual violence perpetrated by state actors in times of conflict whose struggle for justice has been long, daunting and their right to justice ignored for decades.  We further beseech the ACHPR to call on Kenya to initiate an accountability process for the 2017 elections.

1. Constitutional Reforms

The Constitution of Kenya (2010) continues to be widely celebrated. However, most of the provisions that provide for the protection and participation of marginalised groups as well as structure of government have been subject of debate and contestation including recent calls for their striking off through a referendum. This selective implementation of the constitution continues to set a bad trend and ultimately reflects poorly on our government. The current push for amendments is in bad faith for a constitution that has been in force for barely 10 years.

We encourage the ACHPR to:

• urge Kenya to focus on constitutional implementation and strongly caution it against unwarranted and self-serving amendments that compromise enjoyment of human rights for political expediency.  We further call on Kenya to learn from progressive milestones in terms of inclusion, respect for the rule of law and protection of marginalised groups in other African states; and
• impress upon Kenya to fully ratify the Maputo Protocol without any reservations by the year 2020 so that Women and girls can fully enjoy their rights.

In Conclusion, the KHRC notes that the statements made during the ordinary sessions such as this one, will be mere acts to practice one’s oratory prowess before a congregation unless the commission and its commissioners stand up to defend the institutional and functional independence. We join our colleagues in declaring that this ACHPR of ours shall be totally independent.

Thank you.

We wish to predicate our submission on three key critical facts that seem to not have been deeply considered in the development of the zero draft vis-à-vis the responsibility of companies and obligations of states in situations of conflict. Firstly, increasingly, states have relinquished their monopoly on the legitimate use of force and as such, private military and security firms have gradually taken on functions that used to be the exclusive resort of state bodies. The involvement of such firms in some contemporary conflicts cannot be overlooked.

Secondly, business enterprises not involved in the security field but operating in difficult conflict environments, also exert influence on conflicts to the extent that the wealth they create or extract may attract interest from warring parties and turn a business operation into a military objective. Thirdly, and more apparent, the use of public security personnel to do the heavy lifting for corporations operating in conflict areas in terms of providing security to corporations, quelling civil unrests and intimidating and maiming human rights defenders and communities, has become the norm rather than the exception.

Based on the foregoing, we find Article 15.4 quite deficient in dealing with these realities as the call by this article for “special attention” is seemingly quite removed from the complexity of this issue as it does not denote mandatory pro-activeness on this highly sensitive matter. Additionally, the onus to undertake the so called “special attention” is not explicitly assigned to any party.

We propose the following thus:

1. Explicit recognition of increased risks of negative impact of business activities for communities in conflict-affected areas;
2. Express provisions that pay due regard to provisions of international humanitarian law and particularly, obligations of states in situations of armed conflict under international humanitarian law and international criminal law;
3. Introducing provisions that address the complicity of states in situations of armed conflict, for example, deployment of public security for use by corporations that in turn fuels violence in conflict areas; and
4. Succinctly addressing the risk of gender based and sexual violence in conflict-affected areas, which, as accurately captured in the commentary under UNGP 7, is particularly prevalent in situations of conflict.

Thank you.

Oral Statement on Conflict Affected Areas Made on 18^th October, 2018

With due respects, we introduce to you, our multi-sectoral assembly composed of human rights groups, artists, the Law Society of Kenya and other East African citizens of good will who are deeply concerned about the deteriorating human rights situation in Uganda.

Our attention has been drawn to the egregious acts of human rights violations in various parts of Uganda since 13 August events in the Arua municipality region of northern Uganda following a bitter altercation between the ruling party and opposition supporters, during the Arua Municipality election.

The Ugandan security authorities on 14 August arrested five opposition lawmakers (who are critics of President Yoweri Museveni), two journalists and 28 other people. Of the five lawmakers and of importance is Hon. Robert Kyagulanyi (Bobi Wine). Hon. Kyagulayi was arrested. Allegedly tortured and later charged in a military court in Gulu with the offence of unlawful possession of firearms and ammunition. The other legislators arrested and charged are; Hon. Kassiano Wadri, an independent candidate who won the by-election in Arua, Hon. Gerald Karuhanga, Hon. Paul Mwiru and Hon. Francis Zaake. Lawmakers Hon. Karuhanga, Hon. Mwiru and Hon. Wadri were charged with treason and other offences alongside the 30-other co-accused in a magistrate’s court in the northern Ugandan town of Gulu on 16 August 2018.

“Every time I come to court my children always ask me whether I have gone to pick their father,” Rebeccah said after the court found the OCS in contempt of court in July.

One prominent case that marked a turning point in the fight against enforced disappearances and extra-judicial executions was that of International Justice Mission (IJM) lawyer Willie Kimani, his client Josephat Mwenda and their driver Joseph Muiruri who were abducted by police officers and subsequently found executed in June 2016.

Baru, Willie, Joseph and Josephat are just a few of the 153 cases of Kenyans who have disappeared in police custody according to verified data published in the Missing Voices website. The website has also verified 438 killings by police officers, whereas 1,006 missing or killed Kenyans are yet to be verified.

Missing Voices is an effort by lobby groups under the Police Reform Working Group to track and document all extrajudicial killings and disappearances and follow cases that are in court. The website will be a one-stop database of all extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances that happen in Kenya, it will explain the circumstances under which the victim was killed and/or disappeared. Through its incident reporting page, witnesses and whistle blowers will be able to report live incidents to the website for investigation and documentation, and reporting.

Missing Voices features high-quality podcasts and videos that give victims of extrajudicial killings a voice.

During the launch, Baru’s wife Rebeccah and two other victims of enforced disappearances will share their stories followed by a panel discussion focusing on effects of enforced disappearances and extrajudicial killings.

As we mark the 2018 International Day of Victims of Enforced Disappearances we demand that;

The president acknowledges that enforced disappearances (EDs) and extrajudicial executions (EJEs) are a systemic problem, apologize to victims, and commit to ensuring accountability; Appoint a Judicial Commission of Inquiry into EDs and EJEs.

The Director of Public Prosecutions to investigate individual and command responsibility for EDs and EJEs and prosecute those found culpable without resorting to the death penalty.

The Attorney General will present legislation that explicitly criminalize EJE and ED in line with international human rights standards.

Website: www.missingvoices.co.ke

Signed by Police Reforms Working Group