Chacha opines that there have been no repercussions for those involved in electoral malpractices for these reasons. In such a situation according to Chacha, it is inevitable that leaders continue to threaten, buy, or trick their way into power. Further without monitoring the electoral process, it is impossible to identify and therefore address any challenges. But all is not lost. With the support of Kenya Human Rights Commission (KHRC), Chacha decided to change the situation.

Reports from 57 human rights’ election monitors such as Chacha highlight misuse of funds in several sectors. State resources for electioneering were noted to have been misused which led to the Commission of Administrative Justice (CAJ), to confirm that public servants who used or misused public resources for the benefit of their party were culpable of abusing their powers. These reports also influenced the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) to issue a legal notice warning state officers against using government resources in campaigns. The IEBC gave all public officers contesting in the 2013 general election two weeks to declare the public facilities at their disposal by virtue of their office. The IEBC warned those that did not comply that they would face fine or imprisonment. Chacha, in his small way, set the pace for an election that prohibited misuses of public resources among other things, with support from CAJ and IEBC.

For the first time, there were repercussions for those involved in electoral malpractices thanks to 57 human rights election monitors like Chacha who operated in 20 counties across Kenya. For instance, those accused of voter bribery and people attempting to vote twice were arrested. Politicians then realised that there was a watchdog and this changed their behaviour. This could be a reason why youth were not incited as frequently as done in the past.

In-depth monitoring of elections also led to better preparedness for the actual elections, for example, there were adequate materials at polling stations, biometric voter identification devices etc. Additionally, Electronic transmission of results functioned better and there were prior consultations between civil society and the IEBC. This is evidence that monitors, such as Chacha, can change the status quo and mitigate electoral related problems.

Chacha was empowered to take charge in this process as he was trained in election monitoring tools, election related law, international instruments and treaties on civil and political rights by KHRC. As a community-based Human Rights election monitor he utilized the agreed monitoring tools to record human rights violations related to party nominations, electoral campaigns and voting. He conducted this in a data driven process attending politically motivated events (rallies, funerals, office launches, church meetings and fundraising events) and systematically monitored the media. He made records of all electoral processes before, during and after the elections. Community-based Human Rights monitors submitted over 3,000 reports with photos, audio and visual recordings, to the KHRC and reported malpractices to relevant government bodies.

Like many Kenyans Chacha previously feared elections as they have always resulted in violence. Elections have seen politicians use ethnicity to mobilize votes which has whipped up tensions that have resulting in cross-community violence. The highly contested 2007 general elections and the disputed Presidential results led to 1,100 people killed, thousands injured, at least 40,000 incidents of sexual and gender-based violence and over 600,000 being displaced.

Lack of oversight of elections has led to violence, threats of violence (including Gender-based violence), militias and criminal gangs against all persons. It also led to use of hate speech and unsavoury language in electoral campaigns; misuse of public resources by those in power to their unfair advantage in the electoral contest; and voter buying, voter bribery, unwarranted assisted voting, voter intimidation and theft of IDs. Marginalized groups such as women, persons with disabilities, youth and other minorities also saw discrimination during these processes.

History has a role to play in the reasons as to why stakes are high in an election win for many Kenyans. Political leadership in Kenya is a space for the elite ethnic groups favoured by or who collaborated with the colonial administration. This system is not inclusive with successive Governments leaving certain ethnic groups out of politics. Marginalised ethnic groups lack the numbers to win an election in a country where voting is primarily along ethnic lines. This has led some to question whether the First Past The Post (FPTP) electoral system is suitable for Kenya and whether a proportional representation system would foster better representation and inclusivity.

Marginalised ethnic groups also have a sense that successive elections have been stolen leading to a sense of disenfranchisement and sentiments that they should disengage from political participation. Resource allocation has mirrored allocation of political power so that Counties that do not have senior politicians representing their interests lack developmental initiatives such as infrastructure, social amenities and employment opportunities.

Positively, the Electoral Monitoring and Reform project, supported by the Danish Embassy through the Drivers of Accountability Programme (DAP), resulted in a paradigm shift from monitoring elections only on the Election Day to monitoring based on the electoral cycle; from pre –election, Election Day and Post- Election. A human rights based approach is used in this process. Arguably, one of the most important aspects of this project was working with existing human rights networks on the ground and individuals such as Chacha meaning that the project made a significant and sustainable contribution to strengthening human rights awareness among the communities.

Nationally, KHRC analyzed the reports it received from community-based monitors across the country and presented findings and recommendations in a report titled 'Democratic Paradox: A Report of Kenya's 2013 General Elections.' The IEBC have lived up to their commitment to act on these recommendations by implementing some of the suggestions made by the KHRC. Effective registration of voters in the diaspora was one of the recommendations made by KHRC. Notably, the IEBC in February, 2015 launched an online mapping tool that will see them effectively register voters in the diaspora. Additionally, in March 2015 the IEBC launched a school project on voter education that seeks to nurture democracy in young Kenyans. Development of strategies for school-based voter Education targeting primary and secondary schools as a way of inculcating democratic values in both pupils and students was another recommendation made by KHRC.

The structures in place to enable civil society, the IEBC, political parties, the office of the registrar of political parties and other electoral stakeholders to collaborate in monitoring elections have been reinforced through the creation of the election Technical Working Group (TWG) which is co-chaired by KHRC and the Institute for Education in Democracy (IED). Additionally, KHRC and IED created a WhatsApp group which enables CSOs, election monitors, IEBC commissioners and senior management to engage on key emerging electoral issues in real time. This should make the challenge of a lack of civilian oversite of elections a thing of the past.

However, electoral related violence is an issue across several African countries with many states suffering the ethnic polarization that Colonialism seeded through its divide and rule policies. Subsequent political despots have enhanced this through the manipulation of ethnic identity for political gain. The ‘Big Man’ approach to politics remains, where a leader, promises ‘development’ and ‘jobs’ to his ethnic homeland if voted into power, instilling a commitment to ethnic voting even though the majority of poor people from all ethnicities do not benefit whoever the leader.

There are numerous African leaders who have sought to undermine democracy in a desperate bid to cling to power, for example, Burundi in 2015. Thus, regionally, KHRC’s electoral governance assessment framework has been utilized in South Africa, Botswana, Malawi and Zambia. KHRC has raised the potential for an African framework on election monitoring at the African Commission on Human and People’s Rights (ACHPR) where there has been significant interest in developing such a framework.

In recognition of its established track-record on electoral governance matters, KHRC in 2014 was admitted as a member to the Global Network of Domestic Election Monitoring (GNDEM). This membership will enhance its regional and international advocacy on electoral governance. This is because it avails a global platform to engage with likeminded organizations on topical electoral governance issues. It will also share reports and other resources. Through this, people outside of Africa can benefit from the use of this practical election process monitoring tool.

Elections in Africa can be reformed to become inclusive, credible and peaceful processes that can lead to better governance across the continent. It is through people like Chacha, that this ambitious dream shall be realized

The KHRC participation included offering free legal advice to the public as well as distributing advocacy reports to help empower and educate Kenyans with knowledge in when in search for redress and justice.

“The public needs Legal assistance, to meaningfully engage and effectively make use of the legal system and to enjoy the full breadth and freshness of the Constitution of Kenya 2010 which guarantees the various rights to a fair trial.” Said Justice Mohammed Ibrahim.

The highlight of the event was different age generations sharing symbolic mementos with younger generations. The 90s & 80s shared a picture of the memorial and the flag of Kenya to the 70S & 60S generation. The flag symbolized the fight for self-determination and the picture captured the reparation gesture that the memorial stands for.

The 70s & 60s shared the Constitution of Kenya, with the 50s&40s; the Katiba symbolized the struggle for the second liberation and for the realization multipartism. The 50s&40s shared four reports i.e. Krigler, TJRC, CIPEV and Ndungu’s report on Historical Land Injustices. These are some of the important documents that detail what bedevils Kenya as a country yet their recommendations are yet to be implemented.

The 30s & 20s shared a whistle and a picture of a flash disk with the below 20s generation. These mementos signified the new space of online advocacy platforms  and the culture of whistle blowing.

Apart from the presence of the Maumau War Veterans Association, other liberation movements like Dini Ya Musambwa, Koitalel Arap Samoei and Mekatilili Wa Menza also attended the event. There was also representation from the civil society, donors and representatives from five universities and twenty five schools both primary and secondary.

Other panelists at the launch included; Commissioner Jedidah Wakonyo from the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights, Dr.Willy Mutunga former chief justice of Kenya and Kwame Owino the Chief Executive Officer, Institute of Economic Affairs and John Tuta, Head of legal at The Attorney Genral's Office.

KHRC was among the commissions that validated the report. The report assesses Kenya’s progress towards improving government accountability, promoting civic liberties, human rights, rule of law and transparency over a three year period, between January 2013 and July 2016.

The report is divided into four components; Civic Space, Security and Human Rights, Rule of Law and independence of the Judiciary and Corruption and accountability.

“Closing of civic space is an attempt by the state to disrupt citizen power” stated George Kegoro

To access the full report click here 

To view more photos from the launch click here

Security Council Meeting With AU

(New York, September 22, 2016) – The African Union (AU), in advance of a meeting with the United Nations Security Council on September 23, 2016, should end consideration of a call for mass withdrawal of its members from the International Criminal Court (ICC), a group of African nongovernmental organizations and international groups with a presence in Africa said today.

In January, the AU decided to mandate its Open-Ended Committee on the ICC to develop a “comprehensive strategy” that includes withdrawal from the ICC. The committee met on April 11, and identified three conditions that it said should be met for the AU to avoid calling for withdrawal. These included a demand for immunity for sitting heads of state and other senior officials from prosecution before the ICC.

“AU efforts to undermine the only permanent criminal court for victims of atrocities are fundamentally at odds with the AU’s rejection of impunity, and with its decision to make 2016 as the AU’s year of human rights,” said Stella Ndirangu of the Kenya section of International Commission of Jurists. “The AU’s commitment to justice cannot be reconciled with protecting African and other leaders from accountability for mass atrocities before the ICC.”

Article 4 of the Constitutive Act of the AU expressly rejects and condemns impunity. The AU has also identified justice as one of its “shared values,” and 2016 as the “African Year of Human Rights with Particular Focus on the Rights of Women.”

Some African ICC members are taking important steps to limit impunity, the organizations said. At the AU’s summit in Kigali from July 10 to 18, several African countries – Botswana, Côte d’Ivoire, Nigeria, Senegal, and Tunisia – pushed back against a potential call by the African Union for a mass exit of African countries from the International Criminal Court. Burkina Faso, Cabo Verde, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and Senegal alsoentered reservations to the AU decision that was adopted at the summit to continue its consideration of ICC withdrawal.

In the period before the summit, 21 international and African nongovernmental organizations released avideo featuring 12 African activists on the importance of the ICC and the need for African governments to support the court. The video, and a shortened version of it, have attracted more than 80,000 views on social media.

Withdrawal from the ICC is a decision to be made by individual countries and cannot be carried out by the AU. At the same time, a call from the AU for countries to withdraw or consider withdrawal would make it more difficult politically for African countries to show support for the court.

“The ICC remains the crucial court of last resort,” said Timothy Mtambo of Malawi’s Center for Human Rights and Rehabilitation. “The AU should work to strengthen and support the ICC, not urge its members to quit the institution.”

The work of the Open-Ended Committee on the ICC is the latest development in a backlash against the ICC by some African leaders, focused on charges that the ICC is unfairly targeting Africa. The backlash first surged in the wake of the 2009 ICC arrest warrant for President Omar al-Bashir of Sudan, on charges of serious crimes committed in Darfur. It reached a new level of intensity in 2013, when then ICC suspects Uhuru Kenyatta and William Ruto were elected president and deputy president of Kenya, respectively.

Six out of the nine African situations under ICC investigation came about as a result of requests or grants of jurisdictions by African governments – Côte d’Ivoire, Democratic Republic of Congo, Mali, Uganda, and two requests from the Central African Republic. In January, the ICC prosecutor opened the court’s first investigation outside Africa, in Georgia, and it is conducting several preliminary examinations of situations outside Africa. They include Afghanistan, Colombia, Palestine, and alleged crimes attributed to the armed forces of the United Kingdom deployed in Iraq.

At the same time, some powerful countries – including China, Russia, and the United States, all permanent UN Security Council members – and their allies have been able to avoid the reach of international justice. They have been able to do that by not joining the ICC and because they have a veto on the UN Security Council, which can refer situations to the court. The organizations encouraged the AU to raise these concerns during its meeting with the UN Security Council.

The three conditions the AU’s Open-Ended Committee on the ICC set at its April 11 meeting for remaining in the ICC are:

• Immunity under the ICC’s Rome Statute for sitting heads of state and heads of government and senior government officials;
• Intervention of the ICC in cases involving African states only after those cases have been submitted to the AU or AU judicial institutions; and
• Reduction in the powers of the ICC prosecutor.

Blanket immunity for sitting heads of state has never been available before international criminal courts dealing with crimes under international law. No international tribunal – from the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg, to the International Criminal Tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, to the ICC – has allowed immunity on the basis of official position.

The AU in 2014 adopted a protocol to give its regional court authority to prosecute grave crimes, also while granting immunity for sitting heads of states and other senior government officials. That protocol, which needs 15 ratifications before coming into force, has yet to be ratified by any country.

Kenya has played a leading role in mobilizing AU attacks on the ICC since 2013. On September 19, the ICC issued a finding of non-cooperation by Kenya in the now-withdrawn case against Kenyatta to the ICC’s Assembly of States Parties. The charges in the case against William Ruto, Kenya’s deputy president, were vacated for lack of evidence in April.

The decision is the first ICC finding of non-cooperation related to the failure of an ICC member country to provide assistance to the prosecution’s investigations.

For more on views of independent organizations on backlash against the ICC in Africa, please visit:
http://www.southernafricalitigationcentre.org/2015/07/02/101-civil-society-organisations-support-salcs-efforts-to-arrest-bashir/
http://www.icj-kenya.org/index.php/media-centre/press-releases/7-news/647-africa-civil-society-recommendations-to-13-session-of-the-assembly-of-state-parties-to-the-rome-statute
https://www.defenddefenders.org/2016/07/african-union-activists-challenge-attacks-on-icc/

For more information, please contact:
In Abuja, for LEDAP-Legal Defence & Assistance Project, Chino Edmund Obiagwu (English): +234-0703-000-0014; or +234-012-802-009; or +234-0803-691-3264 (mobile); or obiagwu@ledapnigeria.org
In Freetown, for Center for Accountability and the Rule of Law-Sierra Leone, Ibrahim Tommy (English): +232-76-365-499; or ibrahim.tommy@gmail.com
In Johannesburg, for Southern Africa Litigation Centre, Angela Mudukuti (English): +27-767-623-869; orAngelaM@salc.org.za
In Lilongwe, for Center for Human Rights and Rehabilitation, Timothy Mtambo (English): +265-992-166-191; or mtambot@chrrmw.org
In Nairobi, for Kenya section of the International Commission of Jurists, Stella Ndirangu (English): +254-7222-336-399; or stella.ndirangu@icj-kenya.org
In New York, for Human Rights Watch, Elise Keppler (English): +1-917-687-8576 (mobile); +1-212-216-1249 (office); or kepplee@hrw.org. Twitter: @EliseKeppler
In New York, for Coalition for the ICC, Steve Lamony (English): +1-646-465-8514; orlamony@coalitionfortheicc.org

The following organizations that are active in an informal group that promotes support for serious crimes endorsed this news release:
Affirmative Action Initiative for Women (Nigeria)
African Center for Justice and Peace Studies (Uganda)
Africa Legal Aid
Center for Accountability and Rule of Law – Sierra Leone
Children Education Society (Tanzania)
Civil Resource Development and Documentation Centre (Nigeria)
Coalition for the ICC
Coalition of Eastern NGOs (Nigeria)
Federation Internationale des Droits de l’Homme (FIDH)
Foundation for Human Rights Initiative (Uganda)
Ghana Center for Democratic Development
DefendDefenders-East and Horn of Africa Human Rights Defenders Network
Human Rights Watch
International Crime in Africa Program, Institute for Security Studies
International Commission of Jurists (Geneva/Johannesburg)
International Commission of Jurists-Kenya
Kenya Human Rights Commission
Kenyans for Peace with Truth and Justice
Legal Defense and Assistance Project (Nigeria)
Malawi Center for Human Rights and Rehabilitation
Kenya Human Rights Commission
NamRights (Namibia)
Nigerian Coalition for the International Criminal Court
Rights and Rice Foundation of Liberia
Southern Africa Litigation Centre

His Excellency, Uhuru Kenyatta

C.G.H. President and

Commander in Chief of The Defence Forces of The Republic of Kenya

Harambee House

Harambee Avenue

P O Box 62345- 00200

Nairobi, Kenya                                                                                                                 

July 4, 2016

HE Uhuru Kenyatta,

Petition to the President of the Republic of Kenya to end enforced disappearances and extrajudicial executions by the National Police Service and provide justice for families of the disappeared and murdered

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [140.99 KB]

Kenyan authorities must urgently investigate the killing last week of three men, including a human rights lawyer, and ensure that those found responsible are held to account in fair trials, 29 Kenyan and international human rights organizations said today.  Human rights activists will today hold demonstrations in Nairobi and other parts of Kenya today to protest the heinous killings.

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [174.60 KB]

Kenyans have reacted with grief and outrage to the discovery of the bodies of Willie Kimani, Josphat Mwendwa and Joseph Muiruri on July 1, 2016. Their bodies were found in Ol Donyo Sabuk River, a week after their abduction further to an appearance at Mavuko Law Courts. Evidence to date indicates they were all victims of enforced disappearance and extrajudicial executions.

Josphat Mwendwa was a boda boda rider pursuing a complaint with the Independent Policing Oversight Authority in respect of his having been shot by an Administration Police officer in April 2015. Willie Kimani was a human rights lawyer with the International Justice Mission, working to defend Josphat Mwendwa. Joseph Muiruri was their taxi driver that day.

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [154.63 KB]