The journey to justice has been long and arduous. For over ten years (since 2003) now, the Kenya Human Rights Commission (KHRC) and the Mau Mau War Veterans Association (MMWVA) have remained focused and relentless in their fight for justice for the Kenyan victims of colonial torture as well as for the rightful recognition of our liberation heroes within Kenya’s body politic. It is that focus and relentless commitment from the KHRC and the MMWVA that has yielded the victory—an out of court settlement with the British Government; an apology from the British Government; and the funding of a memorial from the British Government—that we celebrate today.

Today’s celebration is a true testimony to the fact that all those who commit serious human rights violations, regardless of their standing or position in society, or their might among the nations of the world, must be held to account for their actions. However, we are fully aware of the fact that such accountability is only possible if the perpetrators of human rights violations are subjected to a free, fair and functional justice system. We take this opportunity to thank the British courts for having provided that system for the Kenyan victims and the British government for having finally accepted responsibility for the serious crimes of torture that were perpetrated by the British Colony during the emergency period.

We note that today’s victory only marks one step in the journey for justice for the wrongs that were suffered during the fight for Kenya’s independence as well as providing a real opportunity for a meaningful acknowledgement of the heroic role of the Mau Mau in the struggle for our independence. Therefore, while it is commendable that the British have taken responsibility for the way they treated Kenyans during the Emergency, we will now turn our full focus and attention to the Kenyan Government and demand that it must also take full responsibility for its less than stellar treatment of the Mau Mau liberation heroes since Kenya became independent.

For example, the Mau Mau veterans have long standing issues around land that must be resolved. Most continue to live in conditions of abject poverty and squalor despite their gallant contribution to Kenya’s Uhuru. We hope that any outstanding issues facing the Mau Mau will now be addressed within the framework of the recently released TJRC report, the National Land Commission and the robust provisions of the Constitution of Kenya framework that recognizes the heroic roles of our Mashujaa as well as providing a framework for ensuring that the elderly live in dignity.

Finally we want to note that today’s celebration would not have been possible without the solid and honest commitment of the many men and women who held the firm belief that all those who commit serious human rights violations, regardless of their standing or position in society or their might among the nations of the world must be held to account for their actions if or when they are subjected to a free, fair and functional justice system. While it is impossible to name all of them, we want to take this opportunity to recognize the following for their immeasurable contribution to the Mau Mau cause:

1. Mzee Gitu Wa Kahengeri, Secretary General of the MMWVA: He has remained firmly committed to the course of searching for justice for the Kenyan victims of colonial torture and remained true and honest in his commitment to the Mau Mau.
2. John Nottingham:  We would not have come this far without his meticulous research on the colonial era torture and without his invaluable first-hand account of the terrible acts of torture that took place during the Emergency.
3. Prof. Makau Mutua and the entire KHRC board for their commitment to the Mau Mau case
5. The KHRC staff (both past and present who have worked on this case) and in particular Atsango Chesoni, our current Executive Director and her Deputy Davis Malombe, Steve Ouma, Dan Juma, Mikewa Ogada and George Morara who have all contributed greatly in pushing the wheel of justice for the Mau Mau case this far.
6. Our partners, Senior Counsel Paul Muite and Hon. Gitobu Imanyara as well as Njeri Kabeberi, the Executive Director of the Centre for Multiparty Democracy (CMD), for their unwavering commitment to the Mau Mau case.
7. Prof Carolyn Elkins of Harvard University and Prof. David Anderson for their ground-breaking research on the colonial torture of Kenyans.
8. We also want to thank the former Prime Minister Raila Odinga; the former Foreign Affairs Minister Moses Wetangula; the former Attorney General Amos Wako; the former Justice Minister Eugene Wamalwa and the current Attorney General Prof. Githu Muigai who all have made significant contributions to the Mau Mau case.
9. Last but not least, we want to thank Leigh Day for having taken this case up in 2003 and meticulously pursued it to its logical conclusion. We are most grateful to Martyn Day, Dan Leader, David Roberts, Rebekah Read, Kavita Modi and her field team and our QCs Richard Hemmer and Phillipa Kaufmann for a job well done!

Signed:

Atsango Chesoni, Executive Director, the KHR

Kenyan Members of Parliament (MPs) are known to be some of the best paid in Africa and in deed in the world. In the past they had they had the privilege of setting their own salaries. In the period 2008- 2013, Kenyan taxpayers paid MPs KES 851,000 per month and the President KES 2.4M per month. In the same period, Kenya’s per capita income has been KES 2,000 per month, while minimum wage remained KES 4,050 per month. This means the President earned over 595 times than the average citizen, while MPs in the 10th Parliament earned over 425 times more than the per capita income and 210 times more than the minimum wage paid to the many workers in the agriculture, plantations and allied sector whose sweat is the backbone of Kenya’s economy.

The same MPs in the 10th Parliament in October 2012 passed a bill to pay themselves a further ‘retirement package’ of over Ksh9Million (USD 110,000) each for the 210 MPs. Had this passed, at the time, it would have meant that at Ksh2,000 per month, it would take 61 years for the average Kenyan to earn the Ksh9M bonus that MPs had proposed for each of themselves. In addition to the bonus, the proposed retirement package for MPs included diplomatic passports for them and their spouses, a state funeral and access to the nation's VIP airport lounges. The proposal was thwarted following demonstrations by KHRC and other civil society organizations and public outcry on all media and that resulted in the President slashing the bonuses by half.

But in 2013, the Salaries and Remuneration Commission, a body with the constitutional mandate to among other functions set and regularly review the remuneration and benefits of all state officers include Members of the National Assembly and Senate, reviewed  their salaries downward from a high of KES 851,000 per month to amounts ranging between KES 532,500 – KES 710,000 per month. This was on the basis that the national wage bill that consumes up to 35% of the total national budget is unsustainable in the current state of the Kenyan economy.

However, even before getting down to business, the newly elected Members of the National Assembly have put high on their agenda their demand for pay rise and have rejected the pay cut.

So,what exactly should to elected state officers be doing to earn this money and are they actually offering Kenyanstheirmoney’s worth?

“Functions of Elected State Officers” breaks down the functions of the elected Members of the National Assembly , Senate down to the Ward Representatives that number upto 1450.  It provides short explanations on the functions that the different elected state officers should perform. It has been developed in response to studies that have noted the need to build the capacity of legislators to understand and better perform their role.

The brief also takes cognizance of the right to and duty of citizen participation now recognised in the Constitution of Kenya 2010. It is therefore also intended to help citizens to understand what functions each of the elected state officers ought to perform, be aware of how much s/he as a taxpayer is paying each elected state officer to perform these functions and create awareness on the fact that the Constitution now provides for citizens to recall nonperforming elected state officers. Finally, this brief provides a breakdown of some of the responsibility that citizens ought to take to fulfil their duty of citizen participation.

HRC ELECTIONS CAMPAIGNS MONITORING REPORT

PRESS STATEMENT

With just three days left before Kenyans go to the polls to conduct the first general elections under a new constitutional dispensation, a number of the key ministries, departments and agencies that are directly involved in the electoral process have assured the Kenyan people that they have put in place sufficient measures to ensure that the polling process will culminate in a credible electoral outcome that will secure a peaceful transition. The Kenya Human Rights Commission (KHRC) has, in the process of monitoring the preparedness of the country to engage in the March 4, 2013 general elections found out that a significant number of positive steps have been and continue to be undertaken towards securing free, fair and peaceful elections.

The KHRC commends the active measures as well as the firm commitments that have been given by the various state agencies and political parties towards ensuring a transparent and informed electoral process. Specifically, we want to single out the following initiatives:

• In our earlier interim report on elections released two weeks ago, we noted that civic education was sorely missing and that the IEBC needed to take roll-out civic education promptly. We are glad to note that the IEBC has actively taken up civic education ahead of the elections and that voter education is being conducted through various public fora as well as through media platforms, mainly through TV and radio infomercials. The recently concluded mock-voting exercise also offered the IEBC a good opportunity to test the voting system and where identified, take remedial measures ahead of the March 4^th General Elections.
• One of the biggest challenges facing the key political protagonists (ODM and PNU) in the lead-up to the 2007 General Elections was the insistence by ODM that the judicial system was partial and therefore incapable of handling an electoral dispute. Kenya’s Judiciary has undergone (and is still undergoing) radical transformation and there is increasing confidence among the Kenyan public that courts can be trusted to be impartial arbiters of all socio-economic and political conflicts. This bodes well for the country as we get ready to go to the polls on March 4, 2013. Politicians have publicly stated that they will handle any elections dispute(s) through the courts. The Chief Justice and the Judiciary have established electoral courts and regulations that will oversee the judicious determination of electoral disputes and the swearing in of new leaders at national and county level.

The joint calls by the presidential candidates to their supporters for the peaceful conduct of campaigns and elections through infomercials, campaign events and a recently concluded national day of prayer and peace concert. When politicians make calls for peaceful elections to their supporters;  when they are seen together in public making a commitment to the nation that ‘Kenya is bigger than any of their individual political ambitions’ and that they will resort to non-violent means to resolve any electoral dispute they might have, then it can be said that the right kind of messages aimed at cooling off the searing political temperatures as opposed to the inflammatory messages aimed at fanning tension are getting through.

• The undertaking of the Inspector General of Police to guarantee security and order throughout the electoral process is commendable. The country has witnessed serious incidents of insecurity in the lead up to the general elections and all measures must be put in place to ensure that Kenyans are safe especially during this time of high-stakes elections.
• The gazettement of the appointed National Land Commissioners by the President in light of the on-going heated debates on the politics of land-ownership and governance in Kenya is a welcome mitigating measure against the rising political temperatures around issues touching on real or perceived land injustices. The National Land Commission has been constitutionally mandated to address the issue of land reforms. Politicians should therefore avoid making land a divisive issue and give the Land Commission an opportunity to discharge its mandate and resolve all the issues surrounding land ownership and use in Kenya.
•  Various initiatives by the  civil society, private sector, religious and development organizations and other non-state actors, including ELOG’s innovative approach of establishing a parallel vote tabulation center and the UN Women’s launch of a situation room to observe and intervene on matters affecting women during the elections are all welcome measures to ensure that the integrity and outcome of the March 4^th General Elections is not compromised.
• The two Presidential debates that were held in the month of February 2013. We laud this noble initiative and take this opportunity to congratulate the organizers of the historic debates. The debates were significant since they sought to promote issue-based discussions around key governance concerns. While the jury is still out on whether the debates played any role in influencing the choice of voters—especially in moving them away from ethnic-driven voting to issue-based voting—we at the KHRC are confident that the debates mark the beginning of a new brand of politics where governance issues, as opposed to ethnic-mobilization, will be the determining factor in electing leaders into political office.
• Two days ago, the 17 constitutional commissions and independent offices with the mandate to deal with different components of electoral governance came together to appraise Kenyans of their preparedness-both at individual and collective levels towards elections. This has minimized political uncertainty and increased public confidence towards the electoral process and outcome.
• The outgoing president has also invited the eight presidential candidates, the chief justice and chair of the IEBC for a breakfast meeting which will be part of the confidence building mechanism ahead of the political transition.
• Finally, the presence of the Inter-governmental observer groups from the African Union, the East African Community, COMESA, IGAD, the Common Wealth, the United Nations and the European Union as well as a host of individual countries and other international elections observation groups provide an environment of ‘collective-watching’, which is likely to greatly diminish both the room and the opportunity of those who might be out to commit electoral malpractices.

All the foregoing measures are good in promoting a favorable environment where as a country; we will secure an open, peaceful and informed electoral process and a peaceful outcome to the 2013 general elections. However, a number of concerns still remain. In monitoring the campaign process, the KHRC found out that incidents that clearly show the continued flouting of electoral laws as relates to the political campaigns remain rampant. This report seeks to highlight the incidences of bribery, violence and intimidation, incitement and the use of unsavory language, the misuse of state resources during political campaigns as well as the destruction of campaign materials by political rivals that were captured by monitors in the course of the now almost concluded campaigns.

1. Voter Bribery: In blatant violation of the provisions of Section 64 of the Elections Act, several aspirants have engaged in attempts to induce support from voters through the direct or the indirect disbursement of monies to participants of public assemblies that the said aspirants have addressed. The practice of bribery is often indirect, with payments being made on behalf of an aspirant thorough his/her henchmen. Payments are usually in cash though some have opted to use the mobile phone money transfer services to disburse money to voters. This has also taken the form of buying identity cards with a view to disenfranchising voters based in areas perceived to be opponent’s strongholds.
2. Violence, Intolerance and Intimidation: Contrary to the guaranteed constitutional freedoms of assembly under Article 36 as well as the restrictions of the Elections Act in Section 67 (1) the use of violence and intimidation by some of the supporters of rival political parties continues to plague political campaign activities in some areas. There were near violent disruptions of campaign events in in Embu, Kiambu and Thika which would have degenerated were it not for the speedy intervention of the police service operating in those areas at the time. Over the last weekend, we also noted reported incidents whereby candidates were either booed or had their speeches disrupted in Nairobi, Kisumu and Baringo.
3. Violations targeted against women and other vulnerable groups:  Women candidates continue to experience intimidation from powerful offices and both discrimination and lack of support within their parties, being considered as weaker candidates.
4. Incitement and use of unsavoury language: In 2007 the overt use of hate speech and insults against political competitors contributed significantly to the violence that was experienced in the aftermath of the elections. The use of hate speech is no longer overt and resort is now had to subtle incitement and outright threats through the distribution of leaflets and application of unsavoury language whose effect is to create an atmosphere of irrational apprehension against competing candidates and supporters. While raising factual matters about an opponent’s policies and competencies is crucial to democratic debate, the vilification of one’s political rivals goes beyond what is necessary for democratic political dialogue. It is for this reason Section 67 (1) (m) of the Elections act criminalizes the dissemination of information with the intention of, amongst other things, creating hostility or fear in order to influence the process and outcome of the elections. While outright name-calling  has not been observed, there were numerous occasions where competing candidates  used phrases or imagery that portrayed their opponents in bad light or demeaned them.
5. Misuse of State Resources and Offices: The use of state resources has continued in campaigns regardless of IEBC warnings to the contrary. Our monitoring has continued to reveal that government vehicles are still being used in political campaign activities contrary to Section 68 (1) of the Elections Act. Often, these government vehicles are disguised with civilian number plates to avoid detection. Moreover, there are allegations that some state officers may be getting involved in politics and partisan electoral projects contrary to the existing laws and policies. We opine that the abuse of public resources and state offices in the process of political contest should raise significant questions about the party’s capability of respectfully and transparently applying state resources.
6. Destruction of campaign materials: The destruction of political party campaign material continues unabated despite the express reprimands against the same by the IEBC and the provisions of the Elections Act in Article 67 (1) (n). It seems that aspirants and their adherents are unwilling to contest fairly, respect the political space of others and abide by the explicit directives of the elections management body.

CONCLUSION:
In conclusion, the KHRC commends the above-mentioned state agencies including the IEBC; National Police Service and Judiciary, for the actions that they are taking towards ensuring the delivery of a peaceful and credible election. The KHRC also notes and welcomes the presence of national, regional and international observer groups. We are concerned that the above mentioned violations continue and request the relevant authorities and political players to ensure that the law is respected and enforced. We believe that ensuring the delivery of a peaceful and credible election will only be achieved if citizens also contribute by being vigilant and we urge our fellow citizens to take up this role. Finally, we take this earliest opportunity to urge fellow Kenyans to turn up in big numbers and vote peacefully and conscientiously during the March 4, 2013 General Elections.

Signed:

Atsango Chesoni,

Executive Director

Present at the event were women leaders in the judiciary, media, corporate and non-governmental organizations. It was noted that each of the guests represented triumph over obstacles and a reason to believe for the aspirants present that there is light at the end of their journey.

Speaking at the event, Atsango Chesoni from KHRC pointed out that the Women in Leadership initiative is designed to ensure more women are elected into public office come the 2013 general elections. She added that the female aspirants are still disadvantaged as compared to their male counterparts locally and their female counterparts regionally. She noted that Rwanda for example has a female majority in parliament while Kenya had less that 10% representation in the 10^th Parliament.

Atsango’s sentiments were echoed by Lindey Wafula an aspirant for the Makadara National Assembly seat who decried the little funding allocated to women candidates by the political parties. Ms. Wafula who previously contested for the same seat during the 2010 by elections said despite splitting of the constituency, she still has to pull in vital resources for the over 120,000 voters registered in her constituency.

The media as an election stakeholder also came into the spotlight as it was noted there is a huge disparity in the coverage of male and female candidates. Media coverage statistics it was noted are heavily inclined towards personality rather than issue-based politics and this has locked out most of the unknown female aspirants from the spotlight, denying them a platform that balances out the skewed playing field.

Other speakers at the event amplified sentiments raised above and called for the aspirants not to give up on their quest to have the female presence in public office. Njeri Kabeberi of the Centre for Multi- Party Democracy spoke on the gains in the women movement, lauding recognition that women rights are now considered as human rights. Grace Maingi from URAIA delved into the journey that has been women in leadership the long road. Winnie Lichuma from the National Gender and Equality Commision asked the aspirants to aspire for a legacy by having their politics driven by a vision of tomorrow. She noted that indeed people go into politics for various reasons and its only with a desire to serve the public that will the aspirants succeed as public servants.

Indeed for all the aspirants, having their names on the ballot paper represents a major milestone for women on the road to leadership. By bringing women leaders together, KHRC hopes that the gains made in women’s movement will be amplified and that women in leaders will form the cornerstone for the vision of Kenya’s future.

About the candidates:

• There are 1026 women candidates who will be on the ballot
• Presidential Candidate                       1
• Governor                                             15
• Senator                                                17
• Women Representative                      340
• National Assembly                              153
• County Representative                       500

• Kisumu leads with 3 followed by Uasin Gishu and Taita Taveta each with 2 gubernatorial candidates each. Only other 8 counties will have a woman gubernatorial candidate.

• 17 Women candidates will vie for Senatorial seats with Nairobi, Nyandarua and Busia each fielding 2 female candidates.

• Kisumu with 12 and Kiambu with 10 lead in number of candidates nominated for National Assembly seats with 12 and 10 respectively. Narok, Kericho, Mandera, Wajir, Marsabit and Tana River have no women aspirants for the National Assembly seats.

• Nakuru with 59 candidates leads the country in County Representative aspirants followed closely by Homa Bay 34, , Nairobi 27, Kilifi 24 and Nandi 22. On the flip side, Lamu, Marsabit, Mandera, Bomet, Elgeyo Marakwet, Kericho, Narok, Bungoma and Busia have no women candidates for this position.

• Counties with most candidates are Nakuru with 80, Nairobi 46, Homa Bay 45, Kisii 39, Machakos 37, Kilifi 34 and Muranga 33.

• Counties with the least candidates are Kericho and Narok with 5 each and Mandera and Bomet with 6 each.

Statement Calling Upon Kenyans to Ensure the Integrity of and Accountability for the Upcoming General Elections, 4^th March, 2013

The Kenya Human Rights Commission (KHRC) is issuing this position in light of its mandate of working towards a human rights state and society and within the context of the upcoming general elections scheduled for the 4^th of March, 2013.  The Commission believes that entrenching the culture of constitutionalism especially the implementation of the Constitution of Kenya, pro-people laws and policies and the democratic governance of elections are critical in the realization of this vision.

The upcoming elections are critical as they will be the first under the new constitutional dispensation ushered in by the Constitution of Kenya (2010).  Consequently, they will mark an important new step in the governance of our nation.  They are also the first national elections to be conducted after the tragic violence that occurred in 2007/2008.

The promulgation of the Constitution of Kenya (2010) was an important step in instituting a culture of accountability, respect for the rule of law, protection of human rights and principles of integrity in the governance of Kenya.  Article 3 calls on “every person to respect, uphold and defend” the Constitution. Article 10 of the Constitution provides that national values and principles of governance include: transparency, the rule of law, human rights, non-discrimination and the protection of the marginalized. These values and principles bind all State organs, State officers, public officers and all persons whenever any of them applies or interprets the Constitution, enacts applies or interprets any law; or makes or implements principles of governance.

Furthermore article 73 of the Constitution provides that:

Authority assigned to a State officer is a public trust to be exercised in a manner… that brings honour to the nation and dignity to the office; and promotes public confidence in the integrity of the office.

We note that all elective offices to be contested in the elections are state offices and that therefore our new President, Parliamentarians, Governors and Members of the County Assemblies will be bound by the provisions of Chapter Six of the Constitution and article 73.

We note with regret that, to date, only six individuals have been prosecuted and convicted[1] for their role in the post-election violence and that many Kenyans are still homeless as a result of politically related violence[2].  The issue of justice for victims and survivors of the 2007/2008 post-election violence is yet to be addressed; this amongst other factors therefore casts a shadow over the upcoming general elections.

It is on the basis of the foregoing that we register our strong disagreement with the decision delivered on 15^th February, 2013 by the High Court in Petition Number 552 of 2012 (as consolidated) on the question of the interpretation and enforcement of the leadership and integrity provisions of Chapter Six of the Constitution. We are of the opinion that this decision is erroneous in law and greatly undermines Article 22 of the Constitution.

Specifically, the decision to award costs to the Respondents sets a bad precedent on the conduct of public interest litigation. The ruling on costs is particularly chilling to individual citizens who wish to exercise their right to defend and/or protect the Constitution through courts. The ruling is a complete negation of Article 3, which obligates citizens to defend and protect the Constitution. It is therefore unfortunate that the High Court, having the jurisdiction to interpret the Constitution, chose to abdicate this duty to other constitutional bodies, which have in the past demonstrated their inability and unwillingness to interpret and implement the Constitution, especially in regard to Chapter Six.

We take this opportunity to remind Kenyans that Kenya’s legacy of impunity as manifested in inequality, failed institutions and bad governance practices led to the macabre scenes of violence experienced in the country in 2007/2008. Respect for the Constitution, and in particular the Bill of Rights and Chapter Six on Leadership and Integrity, is therefore absolutely critical to promoting a culture of constitutionalism.

The Kenya Human Rights Commission does not endorse any political party, or alliance of political parties.  The KHRC is committed to the rule of law and respect for human rights.  We therefore reject the election and appointment of any individual credibly implicated in and accused of any crimes and misconduct including crimes against humanity; economic crimes, gross human rights violations, moral turpitude or violations of any provisions of the Constitution. No matter who wins the March 2013 general elections, the KHRC will continue to engage in an active, peaceful campaign against impunity and will undertake a campaign to vindicate the values contained in our Constitution. We therefore call upon Kenyans to ensure that the upcoming elections meet the highest threshold of the rule of law, integrity, transparency, accountability, equality and respect for human rights.

Thank you

Signed:

Professor Makau Mutua, Chairperson, the Kenya Human Rights Commission

Ms. Betty Murungi, Deputy Chairperson, the Kenya Human Rights Commission

Mr. Davinder Lamba, Member of the Board of the Kenya Human Rights Commission

Professor Karuti Kanyinga, Member of the Board of the Kenya Human Rights Commission

Ms. Mumina Konso, Member of the Board of the Kenya Human Rights Commission

Mr. Mwambi Mwasaru, Member of the Board of the Kenya Human Rights Commission

Mr. Tade Aina, Member of the Board of the Kenya Human Rights Commission

Ms. Atsango Chesoni, Executive Director of the Kenya Human Rights Commission

STATEMENT OF CONCERN BY HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENDERS ABOUT INCREASED THREATS BEING FACED BY HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENDERS AND JOURNALISTS

We as human rights organisations are gathered here today to express our concern about the increased incidence of threats against human rights defenders.  We have noted with concern over the past six months an increasing trend in threats against human rights defenders.  The incidence of such threats has in the last three months intensified.

In particular we note that individuals and or representatives of institutions that have spoken out on the issues of the ICC and integrity have in particular received threats from senior members of the National Police Service.

We note that during the month of December, after the Civil Society Working Group on Police Reforms issued their statement of concern with regards to the integrity of some candidates for the offices of IG and DIG, various members of that team received threats.  We also note the recent berating by parliamentarians of the Chairperson of the Commission on Administrative Justice, Mr. Otiende Amollo, after the Commission made recommendations with respect to the exclusion of potential candidates on the basis of integrity.

We are also cognizant of the rather unpleasant tone that has characterized discourses with respect to the ICC and a continuous trend of ridiculing individuals who have spoken in support of the process or on the issue of witness protection.  In this regard we would particularly like to express concern about the situation pertaining to the Chairperson of the Kenya Human Rights Commission (KHRC), Professor Makau Mutua.

There has been recurrent harassment and intimidation of HRDs through threats, arbitrary arrest and detention and malicious prosecution of HRDs who have raised concerns with regard to deteriorating security situation at urban slums, and those at the forefront of highlighting corruption and champions for the rights of the poor and marginalized groups in the society is a cause for concern.

We have also received reports with regards to various journalists and other human rights defenders who have undertaken investigative work. We are concerned that these threats could have the effect of creating a climate of fear which is not conducive as the country is approaching the electoral period.

We wish to remind our fellow citizens that Kenya is a state party to the Rome Statute, to which it acceded voluntarily.  Furthermore the citizens of Kenya overwhelmingly voted for the Constitution in 2010, Chapter Six of the Constitution which enshrines the principles of leadership and integrity are a fundamental part of the principles and values that we as Kenyans have agreed to be bound by.

We urge all state organs and in particular the IEBC, the National Police Service Commission and EACC to support the initiatives being engaged in by the Kenyan people to ensure that we have leadership that meet the integrity standards that are laid out in our Constitution.  We commend the CAJ, Independent Police Oversight Authority (IPOA), CIC, KNCHR, the Judiciary and other bodies that have been standing up on issues of integrity.

We ask the Kenya Police Service, National Police Service Commission and IPOA as well as other state organs charged with the responsibility of security to reassure the public and human rights defenders that they have put in place measures to ensure their safety particularly in the lead up to and after the elections.

At a time that they should be concerned about the security of Kenyans, MPs are once again planning how to raid Treasury. We call on all Kenyans to say no to this robbery of the country by the MPs.  We say no to state funerals! No to exorbitant send offs! No to diplomatic passports! No to greed and ransacking of the Kenyan people!

We demand that the country’s resources be directed at addressing the critical security situation and ensuring peace for our country women and men in the Tana Delta, Baragoi and Mathare. We urge Kenyans not to make the mistake of voting for continued greed.  We urge President Kibaki not to assent to these obscene demands.  In view of this, we urge Kenyans of all walks of life to show up in large numbers on Monday to protest against this greedy and obscene conduct by parliamentarians.

We shall be gathering  on Monday January 14, 2013 at 9.00am at the Freedom Corner, Uhuru Park, Nairobi  where the mass action march will begin.

Since July 2012, KHRC has been engaged in monitoring the electoral processes in the lead up to the March 2013 general elections through its Electoral Processes Monitoring Center KHRC would like to commend the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) for its efforts toward ensuring that voter registration process is on course.

Particularly the KHRC lauds the IEBC on: 1) the expeditious manner in which the registration exercise is being carried out; 2) the IEBC’s publication of voter registration centers across the country through the local dailies; 3) the IEBC’s use of various ICT platforms to encourage members of the public to register to vote including SMS updates and alerts; 4) the conduct of its registration officials who have been open and transparent concerning the registration process including the challenges being experienced; 5) the quick response of the IEBC to the various concerns raised by civil society and other actors concerning the registration process; and 6) the cooperation offered by the IEBC Commissioners and Secretariat in pursuing a transparent and apposite registration process.

The KHRC, however, is concerned about the low numbers of people that have so far turned out to register for the upcoming polls in 2013 and has noted the following issues that need to be urgently addressed by the relevant state and non-state actors:

1. The low registration figures in the counties within the former Coast, Rift Valley and North Eastern Provinces: the updated figures published by the IEBC on the number of individuals registered in the more marginalized areas indicate extremely poor turn-out in Kwale (30%), Kilifi (41%), Turkana (27%), West Pokot (33%), Trans Nzoia (39%) Wajir (25%), Mandera (16%) and Garissa (27%). This has been occasioned by a variety of factors including the logistical complexities of conducting registration in the largely nomadic communities in the aforementioned areas, poor transport and communication infrastructure, lack of identification documentation due to protracted vetting processes and centralized collection points, insecurity and voter apathy.

Recommendation: KHRC recommends that the government provide special assistance to the IEBC including facilitation of air travel and to assist IEBC registration officials to locate and register members of the aforementioned nomadic communities through the process of mobile voter registration. Further, IEBC should consider employing mechanisms to reach people who live in vast Wards  with poor infrastructure and have problems reaching registration centres nearest to them, for examples Wards in Western Kenya, Lower Eastern and parts of Rift Valley.

2.  Insufficient information on the location of the registration centres and “nomadic” nature of some centres: While it is commendable that IEBC has released information on the location of the registration centres, it is also of concern that this information is piece-meal and at times inconsistent. Many people are still asking on social media where to find their registration centres while others go to register only to find that the advertised centre was only available at a certain time and is no longer available, and there is no indication where next to find a centre. This is at most demoralizing to would-be registered voters. It is also of concern that to date, IEBC has not published the list of registration centres on its website, which could be of much help.

Recomendation: KHRC recommends that IEBC publishes the full list of all the registration centres in the daily newspapers at once rather than on unpredicted different days for ease of access to information. Further, this information should be made available on the IEBC website and other ICT platforms.

3. Low collection of ID documents by the youth and individuals form marginalized areas: KHRC has, in monitoring the registration process, noticed that a significant portion of the youth as well as individuals in the marginalized areas face being locked out of the registration process due to the lack of identification documentation (i.e. national identity cards or passports). Indeed, KHRC noted that most of those being turned away from the registration centers are individuals with waiting cards – largely comprising of the youth.

KHRC realizes that there are numerous identity documents already processed by the Ministry of State for Immigration and Registration of Persons (MSIRP) and disseminated to the respective provincial and district administrative offices where they remain uncollected.

Recommendation: The KHRC would like to request the MSIRP to, where practicable and in light of the importance of the registration process, engage ICT platforms such as SMS’s to alert citizens, whose identification documentation have been processed, to proceed to collect the said documents from the relevant offices.

While it is commendable that IEBC has declined the use of waiting cards for the registration process, KHRC further petitions  President Kibaki not to assent to amendments by Parliament  to the Elections Law providing persons with waiting cards eligibility to register with the said cards. While we fully support the initiative to have as many registered voters on board as possible, we also strongly believe the process should not in any away impair IEBC’s ability to secure a legitimate and credible voters register as waiting cards can be easily counterfeited. The process of counterfeiting may raise the additional challenges of ascertaining those with valid and invalid waiting cards and bring the process into reproach.

4. Voter migration: KHRC has noted that a good number of voters, while working in urban centers prefer to register in their rural or the so called ethnic areas/regions. Some of those who highlight this preference are concerned over security in the aftermath of the polling process in view of the violent outcome of the 2007 elections. Others prefer to vote in their rural homes out of the habitual a desire to elect leaders from their respective rural areas of origin. Some people may be unable to go and register in their preferred rural constituencies because of the cost in implications of having to travel three times, first to register, second for the Christmas holidays and thirdly to eventually go and vote.

Recommendation: KHRC  appeals to citizens to re-evaluate their choices as to the location of registration based on the criterion of greatest and most proximate interest – i.e. if one habitually resides and works in a particular area, then his/her civic duty to elect representatives at county and national level is best exercised with regards to aspirants who will represent those areas in which he/she works and resides. It is indeed a waste of one’s right to suffrage if one will vote for a representative from a rural location based on mere paternal interests over a representative in whose jurisdiction one habitually resides and works.

Moreover, KHRC  challenges the national security agencies in the country to highlight to the public all security measures being taken to ensure a peaceful electoral process in 2013 both during and after the elections.

5. Low turn-out among women: KHRC has also noted the fact that in most areas, there has been low turn-out among women with regards to registration. There is indication that this is attributable to a variety of factors with the most common being apathy among women voters as well as work commitments of most women of voting age. Indeed, many women have been known to report to registration centers late in the evening hours after the days registration has been concluded. These largely include domestic, farm and industry workers.

Recommendation: KHRC appeals to all employers in the formal and informal sectors to allow employees leave for the strict purpose of registration in light of the importance of the upcoming electoral process. KHRC also calls upon all women to turn out and register if they are to participate in influencing the governance of the country.

Conclusion:

In light of these  challenges facing the registration process and the need to secure legitimacy of the electoral process in 2013 through genuine and popular elections, the KHRC calls upon the relevant state agencies and the IEBC to apply all measure possible, including extending the registration period by one week, to secure the registration of the initially targeted 18 million voters.

The KHRC implores all Kenyans to exercise their patriotic conscience by registering to participate in the upcoming electoral process and selecting such persons as will serve the sovereign men, women and children of this country and honour the Constitution of this republic.

Sincerely,

Atsango Chesoni, Executive Director

The Ford Foundation Champions of Democracy Award was created by the Ford Foundation Eastern Africa office as a one-time special honor that will provide $100,000 grants to 10 extraordinary leaders and their organizations to celebrate five decades of working with people and organizations on the frontlines of social change.

While addressing the award recipients, Maurice Makoloo, Ford Foundation’s East African Regional Representative said, “ You have been selected not only because you are leading innovators in your fields, but because your ideas and programs have the potential to shape national or global outcomes.”

Since the foundation’s work began in Eastern Africa in 1962, the region has witnessed tremendous transformation. Economic opportunities have grown. Stronger institutions are emerging. Good governance is increasingly becoming a reality. There is also an expansion and deepening of democracy and respect for women’s rights which has increased dramatically. These successful 50 years in East Africa, Ford Foundation attributes to the direct result of the partnership between the foundation and visionary partners like the KHRC and the other nine honorees.

“You and our other nine honorees represent the vision, courage, commitment and willingness to take risk that are necessary to bring about lasting social change”, said Mr. Makoloo, adding that, “ We hope that the will open greater opportunity for each of you to promote and advance the breakthrough work you are leading.”

For 75 years, the Ford Foundation has been committed to strengthening democratic values, reducing poverty and injustice, promoting international cooperation and advancing human achievement worldwide. The KHRC echoes the Ford Foundation Eastern Africa office’s sentiment that in deed it is an honour to work with the Ford Foundation and look forward to seeing the KHRC vision grow.