DOCSLIB.ORG

Industrial Court Judges, Eight High Court Judges, and 15 Environment and Land Court Judges

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Industrial Court Judges, Eight High Court Judges, and 15 Environment and Land Court Judges 2 State of the Judiciary Report, 2012 - 2013 Preface This is the Second Annual State of the Judiciary and Administration of Justice Report (SOJAR), which has been prepared in fulfillment of Section 5 (2) (b) of the Judicial Service Act. It covers the period July 1, 2012 to June 30, 2013, which coincides with the Government of Kenya financial year. It is also the second report since the launch of the Judiciary Transformation Framework (JTF) in May 2011. This has been an eventful year for the Judiciary. We have made marked progress but also witnessed serious challenges that have threatened the Judiciary’s transformation and shaken Hon. Dr. Willy Mutunga, D. Jur, SC, EGH, public confidence in the process. Chief Justice and President of the Supreme Court of Kenya Republic of Kenya. The Judiciary has had to make tough decisions in order to protect public resources. And whereas the process may look a little messy to the public eye, there is no doubt that these choices have been made and decisions taken in the public interest. The Judiciary remains supremely confident that it shall build on the achievements made and deal with the challenges posed while the compass of transformation remains firmly fixed. This has been the year of active implementation of the JTF at the macro level, and combined planning and implementation at the micro level, particularly within departments and directorates. We have been testing the objectives and viability of transformation and transition on the ground, and are learning important lessons. We have made progress, but we also made mistakes. Some of these challenges are disappointing but not entirely surprising. Some, such as emergent corruption at the administrative cadres that has attended the increase in our budget size, are a natural consequence of the transformation objective of securing additional resources the institution required in the first place to undertake far reaching reforms at a time when the institution still had weak and underdeveloped internal oversight and codified mechanisms and processes. Others are a product of the political context of transition in 2012/2013. Going forward, the Judicial Service Commission and the Judiciary will invest heavily in the establishment of an elaborate and effective internal accountability infrastructure that has in- built checks and balances for the protection of public resources. Arguably, infrastructure expansion, broadly defined, has been the embodiment of the Judiciary and justice sector transformation this year. We have expanded the attitudinal infrastructure of the staff through culture change workshops; the physical infrastructure of the courts through construction and rehabilitation; inter-agency cooperation through revitalization and expansion of the National Council for the Administration of Justice (NCAJ); and the resource base infrastructure of the institution through government, World Bank and United Nations Development Programme support. These investments will continue. The rest of the justice sector State of the Judiciary Report, 2012 - 2013 3 has also made important strides in the administration of justice. Various reform initiatives are on course as a consequence of the implementation of the Constitution. NCAJ and the Court Users Committees (CuCs) will begin to play a much bigger and central role in the administration of justice. Though the NCAJ is still in its nascent stages, it has taken off to a good and encouraging start. However, challenges still remain: low and inequitable budgetary allocation; insufficient collaboration and coordination; uncertainties of transition; statutory instabilities; low to average productivity and efficiency of partner agencies are some of the key challenges among others. In this regard, it is important that additional resources are directed to NCAJ and its agencies so that they are able to execute their mandates effectively. At the Judiciary, courts construction will continue, as will be the decentralisation of courts. The legal requirement of having a High Court station in each county will continue to be pursued, as will be the decentralization of the Court of Appeal, possibly to Eldoret and Nakuru. However, this will require additional resources. We are glad to note that several Governors are donating land for court construction and expansion, and more should be encouraged to follow suit. In order to facilitate increased access to justice, the JSC will have a structured conversation with various ministries on how to systematically bring Tribunals under the Judiciary to give effect to the constitutional provisions that make them part of the institution. It is important that Parliament notes that this, together with courts construction, will again have huge budgetary implications. The success of Judiciary transformation and the justice sector depends on a constructive collaboration among the branches of government. It is important that a harmonious inter-branch relationship is nurtured and cultivated if all the agencies work towards the betterment of the society and service of the Kenyan people. The Judiciary and the NCAJ will play their part in this regard and invite other actors to similarly do the same. The quest for justice and the administration of justice stretches beyond the courtrooms. Every institution, including Parliament, the Executive, Independent Commissions and Offices, and every member of the public has a duty to serve the cause of justice. We must recognize therefore that while the Judiciary is intent on establishing itself as a hub of homegrown jurisprudence, it will take more than the courts to entrench a culture of Rule of Law in our institutional and public psyche. The other organs of government, non-state actors and the public must therefore do their part. The data in this Report demonstrates that whereas work is being done across other justice sector agencies, the output is still not optimal. There is certainly still a lot more to be done in order for the Judiciary and other justice sector agencies to meet the full expectations of the Kenyan people. Hon. Dr. Willy Mutunga, D. Jur, SC, EGH, Chief Justice and President of the Supreme Court of Kenya Republic of Kenya 4 State of the Judiciary Report, 2012 - 2013 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This 2nd Annual State of the Judiciary and Administration of Justice Report is the cumulative handiwork of extraordinary dedication. This progress would not have been possible without the new culture of constant documentation and periodic reporting that the employees of the Judiciary are beginning to, and must forever, embrace. Nevertheless, this report was prepared in difficult and challenging circumstances. I would therefore like to salute all the Judiciary’s members of staff who worked with a renewed spirit, adapted to rapid change, and made the achievements we record here possible in these trying times. I want to thank them also for providing the information and data that has made this report possible. The Registrars and Directors have done a good job in helping to compile this. I would like to express my sincere gratitude to the many resourceful stakeholders in the justice sector through the NCAJ for their unwavering cooperation and support in the collection, analysis and reporting of the information that went into this report. I also thank GIZ and UNDP for their support for the transformation programme including their contribution in the preparation of this report. Finally, I wish to extend my special thanks to the State of the Judiciary and Administration of Justice Report Editorial Committee comprising of Abdul Omar, Dennis Kabaara, Duncan Okello, Hon. Lyna Sarapai, John Muriuki, Katra Sambili, Kwamchetsi Makokha and Muthoni Njunge as well as Aaamera Jiwaji, Michael Murungi and Ednar Kuria who reviewed and edited the draft. Their singular dedication, insight, professionalism and creativity ensured that this report is done. The institution is grateful to them for their service in facilitating the establishment of a comprehensive reporting framework of its own that will be used for years to come. Thank you. Hon. Dr. Willy Mutunga, D. Jur, SC, EGH, Chief Justice and President of the Supreme Court of Kenya Republic of Kenya State of the Judiciary Report, 2012 - 2013 5 Table of Contents PREFACE .....................................................................................................................................................................2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .................................................................................................................................................4 LIST OF TABLES, FIGURES & ANNEXES...........................................................................................................................8 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................................................................................. 10 OVERVIEW ......................................................................................................... 11 PART 1 ACCESS TO JUSTICE ..................................................................................25 CHAPTER 1: PEOPLE-FOCUSED DELIVERY OF JUSTICE ...................................................................................................27 1.0 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................27 1.1 Systems of Courts and Case Load ..............................................................................................................27
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Kenya's Supreme Court
    Kenya’s Supreme Court: Old Wine in New Bottles? By Special Correspondent As the six Supreme Court judges were adjudicating Kenya’s first presidential election petition in March 2013, Justice Kalpana Hasmukhrai Rawal was waiting for a new president to take office and the newly elected National Assembly to convene so that her nomination as Deputy Chief Justice could move forward. The Judicial Service Commission (JSC) had settled on her appointment after interviewing a shortlist of applicants in February 2013. The Judges and Magistrates Vetting Board had earlier found her to be suitable to continue serving as a Court of Appeal judge. Justice Rawal eventually joined the Supreme Court on 3 June 2013. Two years later, Justice Rawal became the second Deputy Chief Justice (after Nancy Baraza, who resigned after she was heavily criticised for abusing her authority by threatening a security guard after the guard demanded to search her at a mall) to be embroiled in controversy. In 2015, Rawal challenged a notice that she retire at the age of 70. Around the same time, the then Chief Justice, Dr Willy Mutunga, would announce that he wanted to retire early so that the next Chief Justice would be appointed well ahead of the next election. In May 2014, Justice Philip Kiptoo Tunoi and High Court judge David Onyancha challenged the JSC’s decision to retire them at the age of 70. They argued that they were entitled to serve until they reached the age of 74 because they had been first appointed judges as under the old constitution. What seemed like a simple question about the retirement age of judges led to an unprecedented breakdown in the collegiate working atmosphere among the Supreme Court judges that had been maintained during the proceedings of the presidential election petition.
    [Show full text]
  • Judging the Judges: Who Are the Supreme Court Justices?
    By Apollo Mboya If there is a jurisdiction that the Justices of the Supreme Court of Kenya curse is the court’s exclusive original jurisdiction to hear and determine presidential election petitions. It is both legal and political but politics reign supreme. In a highly divided country, the court will be doomed whichever way it rules. Former Chief Justice Dr. Willy Mutunga, conscious of the impact of “political jurisdiction” on the courts, expressed his frustrations in a public forum that courts ought not handle election disputes but instead politicians should “deal with their own shit” elsewhere. In his dissenting opinion in Bush v. Gore, Justice Stevens, underscoring CJ Mutunga’s thinking sympathized with the Supreme Court of the United States and indeed the judiciary following the highly disputed 2001 election dispute between George Bush and Al Gore opining as follows: Although we may never know with complete certainty the identity of the winner of this year’s presidential election, the identity of the loser is perfectly clear. It is the Nation’s confidence in the judge as an impartial guardian of the rule of law. Although SCOTUS does not have exclusive jurisdiction on presidential election dispute as Kenya’s, Bush v. Gore has been the court’s sore thumb that is thought to have led to a “court generated president”. Erwin Chemerinsky in his book The Case Against the Supreme Court notes: Bush v. Gore obviously cost the Supreme Court in terms of credibility. More than forty-nine million people who voted for Al Gore, and likely almost all of them regard the Court’s decision as a partisan ruling by a Republican majority [judges] in favour of the Republican candidate.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 20 Constitutional Commissions And
    CHAPTER 20 CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSIONS AND INDEPENDENT OFFICES IN KENYA AND AFRICA: EXPERIENCES, CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES1 This Chapter may be cited as: Ben Sihanya (due 2021) “Constitutional Commissions and Independent Offices in Kenya: Experiences, Challenges and Opportunities,” Chapter 20 in Ben Sihanya (due 2021) Constitutional Democracy, Regulatory, and Administrative Law in Kenya and Africa Vol. 1: Presidency, Premier, Legislature, Judiciary, Commissions, Devolution, Bureaucracy and Administrative Justice in Kenya, Sihanya Mentoring Prof Ben Sihanya Advocates, Nairobi & Siaya 20.1 Problem Statement on Kenyan Constitutional Commissions and Independent Offices Why have the Constitutional Commissions and independent offices CCIOs not delivered on the constitutional promise of popular sovereignty, liberty, service delivery and constitutional democracy? Why does tribal colonialism, tyranny and hegemony persist in elections, appointments, contracts, tenders, service delivery and manipulation and intimidation especially in public service in spite of the constitutional commissions and independent offices? In the ensuing sections of this Chapter, an Afro-Kenyanist conceptualisation and problematisation is used in analysing constitutional commissions and independent offices. I have also discussed some of the debates regarding CCIOs in the context of Building Bridges Initiative (BBI) 2019 and 2020 reports, and the Constitution of Kenya (Amendment) Bill 2020. Sovereignty has at least three components under the Constitution of Kenya 2010 and in constitutional theory and practice. First, sovereignty is the constitutive power including constitution making and constitutional amendment. Second, sovereignty is the power to elect, impeach or recall governors or rulers. Third, sovereignty is the power to monitor and evaluate the government, governors or rulers, governance and to hold them accountable. This chapter assesses the meaning, mandate, operation and significance of constitutional commissions and independent offices.
    [Show full text]
  • Develop the Court Practice Directions on Children Cases. 8
    Published by: National Council on the Administration of Justice (NCAJ) Supreme Court Building, City Hall Way, Nairobi P. O. Box 30041 – 00100, Nairobi Tel. +254 20 2221221 [email protected] www.judiciary.go.ke Copyright © 2019 by National Council on Administration of Justice (NCAJ) Report writers: Dr. Sheila P Wamahiu, Jaslika Consulting, Kieya Kamau (Advocate) and Roselyne Kabata (Advocate) Cover design by: John Muriuki, Directorate of Public Affairs and Communications, Judiciary Design and Layout: Davies Mbinji, Artful Eyes Productions Copyright in the volume as a whole is vested in the NCAJ. Permits free production of the extracts from any of its publication provided that due acknowledgment is given and a copy of the publication carrying the extracts is sent to the publisher’s offices. Disclaimer: This publication has been developed with financial support from the United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund (UNICEF). The views expressed herein do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of UNICEF. Creating a Culture of Justice International Development Law Organization Status Report on Children in the Justice System in Kenya By: The National Council on the Administration of Justice (NCAJ) Special Task Force on Children Matters Status Report on Children in the Justice System in Kenya 3 About the NCAJ The National Council on the Administration of Justice (NCAJ) is established under Section 34 of the Judicial Service Act (No. 1 of 2011). It is a high-level policy making, implementation and oversight coordinating mechanism as reflected in its membership comprising State and Non-State Actors from the justice sector. Its mandate is to ensure a coordinated, efficient, effective and consultative approach in the administration of justice and reform of the justice system.
    [Show full text]
  • National Assembly
    October 27, 2016 PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES 1 NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OFFICIAL REPORT Thursday, 27th October, 2016 The House met at 2.30 p.m. [The Speaker (Hon. Muturi) in the Chair] PRAYERS COMMUNICATION FROM THE CHAIR MEDIATION COMMITTEE ON ASSISTED REPRODUCTIVE TECHNOLOGY BILL Hon. Speaker: Hon. Members, you may recall that yesterday, Wednesday, 26th October 2016, I conveyed a Message from the Senate regarding its decision on the Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill, National Assembly Bill No.36 of 2014. In the Message, it is noted that the Bill was lost at the Second Reading on 19th October 2016 in the Senate. The effect of this is that the Bill now stands committed to a Mediation Committee in accordance to the provisions of Article 112 of the Constitution. Indeed, the Senate has already nominated five Senators to the aforesaid Mediation Committee. Hon. Members, arising from the above and in consultation with the leadership of the Majority Party and Minority Party in the House, I have appointed the following Members to represent the National Assembly in the Mediation Committee: Hon. Millie Odhiambo Mabona, MP. Hon. John Sakwa, MP. Hon. (Dr.) James Nyikal, MP. Hon. (Ms) Cecilia Ngetich, MP. Hon. (Ms) Florence Kajuju, MP. Hon. Members, the Mediation Committee is advised to expeditiously commence the process of developing an agreed version of the Bill in line with the provisions of Article 113 of the Constitution. Hon. Members, knowing that the House may be proceeding for some short recess, the Committee is encouraged to remember that it has a maximum of 30 days within which to complete its function.
    [Show full text]
  • Kenya's Judiciary Through Three Presidential Election Petitions
    60 Days of Independence: Kenya’s Judiciary Through Three Presidential Election Petitions By Special Correspondent Independence Day On the morning of 1 September 2017, Kenya entered the annals of history as only the fourth country in the world to annul a presidential election. Before that, courts in only Ukraine, the Maldives and Austria had annulled presidential elections. No opposition party in Africa had ever successfully petitioned a court to overturn an election, and the decision was praised globally as striking a blow for democracy and the rule of law. “Look, in view of all that evidence, and in good conscience, what other decision would I have made and how would I have looked?” the Chief Justice remarked. Outside the courtroom later, as the majority decision and the two dissenting opinions were read out and broadcast live, the crowds erupted into celebration. From inside the building, it felt as if a bomb had gone off. The judiciary had finally come of age, judicial independence had been attained. In the days that followed, judicial officers discussed on their social media pages how they were retaking their oaths of office. Erstwhile critics in the Internet fever swamps were suddenly gushing with praise for the judiciary. President Uhuru Kenyatta was visibly angry. He had expected the court challenge on his victory to suffer the same fate as the challenge to his 2013 election victory and plans for his swearing in were already in top gear. The day before the Supreme Court decision Kenyatta had even made disparaging remarks about waiting for what some six people would decide regarding the election, and a false news alert on the Kenyatta family-owned K24 TV had implied that the petitioners had lost the case even before the judgment had come in.
    [Show full text]
  • Criminal Procedure Bench Book
    CRIMINAL PROCEDURE BENCH BOOK February 2018 Table of Contents ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................. xi FOREWORD ................................................................................................ xiii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ...................................................................... xv USER GUIDE ............................................................................................... xvi CHAPTER ONE: PRINCIPLES UNDERPINNING THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM .......... 1 I. Introduction .............................................................................................. 2 II. The Constitutional Framework for State Organs ...................................... 3 III. Equality and Dignity ................................................................................. 3 IV. Vulnerable and Disadvantaged Groups .................................................... 4 V. Freedom from Torture, Cruel, Inhuman, and Degrading Treatment ........ 5 VI. Privacy ...................................................................................................... 5 VII. The Constitution and the Judicial Process Generally ............................... 6 Independence of the Judiciary: The Institution and the Court .................. 6 Expeditious Trial ...................................................................................... 6 Undue Regard for Technicalities .............................................................. 6 Transparency and Accountability
    [Show full text]
  • Policy Briefing
    Policy Briefing Africa Briefing N°94 Nairobi/Brussels, 15 May 2013 Kenya After the Elections I. Overview Kenyan democracy was severely tested in the lead-up to, during and after the 4 March 2013 elections. On 9 March, following a tense but relatively peaceful election, the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) declared Jubilee Coali- tion’s Uhuru Kenyatta president-elect. He garnered 50.07 per cent of the vote – barely passing the threshold for a first round victory. His closest opponent, former Prime Minister Raila Odinga, challenged his victory in court, but despite allegations of irregularities and technical failures, the Supreme Court validated the election. Although Odinga accepted the ruling, his party and several civil society organisations questioned the election’s shortcomings and its impact on democracy. President Ken- yatta and his deputy, William Ruto, will have to restore confidence in the electoral process and show robust commitment to the implementation of the new constitution, in particular to devolution, land reform, the fight against corruption and national reconciliation. Failure to do so risks further polarising the country and alienating the international community. Despite some clashes preceding the vote, and following the court’s decision, the nation avoided a repeat of the 2007-2008 post-election violence. A number of fac- tors contributed to a predominantly peaceful election, including a general consensus between the political elite and the citizenry not to bring Kenya to the brink of civil war again. International pressure, in particular from the current International Crim- inal Court (ICC) cases, media self-censorship, restrictions on freedom of assembly, and deployment of security forces to potential hotspots also helped avert unrest.
    [Show full text]
  • Over-Turn Election Put the Supreme Court on Trial
    ISSUE NO. 30, OCTOBER 2017 OVER-TURN ELECTION PUT THE SUPREME COURT ON TRIAL Peter Kagwanja Kenya has made history. Its Supreme Court and a run-off on November 16. In Austria, made a rare ruling, annulling the re-election of where the presidential elections took place on President Uhuru Kenyatta in the August 8, April 24, 2016, the Supreme Court annulled the 2018 elections with a huge margin of 1.4 million results of a second-round run-off on May 22, votes. Blissfully, the ruling affirms Kenya as a 2016 paving the way for a revote on December new bona fide liberal democracy. But it also 4, 2016. reveals creeping ideological and jurisprudential divisions in our courts, likely to undermine This is the second ruling by the Supreme public perception of the impartiality of the Court, created by the 2010 constitution. The judiciary, exposing it to potential reprisals by first was a unanimous affirmation of the results sections of aggrieved political class. of the 2013 presidential elections. In contrast, the 2017 ruling was by a simple majority with Kenya becomes the first country in Africa, and strongly dissenting opinions. exceptionally very few in recent history, where a Supreme Court has over-turned officially Of the six judges involved, four—Chief Justice declared results of a presidential election. David Maraga, his deputy Lady Justice Philomena Mwilu, Justice Smokin Wanjala and It joins Maldive and Austria where the supreme Justice Isaac Lenaola—were of the opinion courts have recently overturned the will of the that ‘irregularities’ and ‘illegalities’ affected the people on legal and administrative conduct of the polls.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 3 Constitutional Values, Principles, and Policy
    CHAPTER 3 CONSTITUTIONAL VALUES, PRINCIPLES, AND POLICY: AGENCY, STRUCTURE, POLITICS AND CULTURE IN KENYA AND AFRICA This Draft Chapter may be cited as: Ben Sihanya (forthcoming 2020) “Constitutional values, principles, policy: and culture: Agency, structure, politics and culture in Kenya and Africa,” in Ben Sihanya (2020) Constitutional Democracy, Regulatory and Administrative Law in Kenya and Africa Vol. 1: Presidency, Premier, Legislature, Judiciary, Commissions, Devolution, Bureaucracy and Administrative Justice in Kenya, Sihanya Mentoring & Innovative Lawyering, Nairobi & Siaya. 3.1 Values and principles of governance under the Constitution in Kenya and Africa The Constitution of Kenya is the organizing principle on popular sovereignty, nationhood, and statehood which we have discussed in Chapter 1 and 2 of CODRALKA 1.1 Constitutional values and principles provide a firm foundation for the governance of economic resources, political powers, and liberty. We adopt an Afro-Kenyanist methodology in integrating ethics, ethos, values, and principles into constitutional democracy to advance individual and group liberties as well as nationhood.2 These include mutual social responsibility…3Some of these are being considered in the debate on Building Bridges Initiative (BBI).4 Constitutional values and structure find expression and are enhanced through agency and structure. And some of the values and principles actually constitute structure to the extent that they have become national or institutional norms or culture. The Constitution of Kenya 2010 provides for national values and principles of governance under Article 10 (on national values and principles of governance), Art 201 (on values and principles of public finance) Art 232 (on values and principles of public service) and other specific articles.5 These shall bind all State organs, State officers, public officers and all persons in at least three contexts.
    [Show full text]
  • Women and the Judiciary
    Women and the Judiciary Geneva Forum Series no 1 Composed of 60 eminent judges and lawyers from all regions of the world, the International Commission of Jurists promotes and protects human rights through the Rule of Law, by using its unique legal expertise to develop and strengthen national and international justice systems. Established in 1952 and active on the five continents, the ICJ aims to ensure the progressive development and effective implementation of international human rights and international humanitarian law; secure the realization of civil, cultural, economic, political and social rights; safeguard the separation of powers; and guarantee the independence of the judiciary and legal profession. ® Women and the Judiciary Geneva Forum Series no 1 © Copyright International Commission of Jurists, September 2014 The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) permits free reproduction of extracts from any of its publications provided that due acknowledgment is given and a copy of the publication carrying the extract is sent to its headquarters at the following address: International Commission of Jurists P.O. Box 91 Rue des Bains 33 Geneva Switzerland The 2013 Geneva Forum of Judges and Lawyers was made possible with the support of: Women and the Judiciary Geneva Forum Series no. 1 Materials relating to the 2013 Geneva Forum of Judges and Lawyers convened by the International Commission of Jurists Women & the Judiciary (ICJ Geneva Forum Series no. 1) i Preface The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) has convened the Geneva Forum of Judges and Lawyers each year since 2010. Organised by the ICJ’s Centre for the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, the Forum gathers legal practitioners from around the world for dialogue aimed at identifying and finding practical solutions to the challenges their professions face.
    [Show full text]
  • Ielrc.Org/Content/W1301.Pdf
    International Environmental Law Research Centre FALLACIES OF EQUALITY AND INEQUALITY MULTIPLE EXCLUSIONS IN LAW AND LEGAL DISCOURSES Patricia Kameri-Mbote Published in: Inaugural Lecture, University of Nairobi, 24 January 2013. This paper can be downloaded in PDF format from IELRC’s website at http://www.ielrc.org/content/w1301.pdf International Environmental Law Research Centre [email protected] www.ielrc.org U N I TAT RE E ET LA BO UNIVERSITY OF NAIROBI Fallacies of Equality and Inequality: Multiple Exclusions in Law and Legal Discourses Inaugural Lecture By Prof. Annie Patricia G. Kameri-Mbote, SC LL.B ’87 (Nairobi), LL.M ’89 (Warwick), JSM ’96, JSD’99 (Stanford) Professor of Law Department of Private Law School of Law Date: 24th January 2013 FALLACIES OF EQUALITY AND INEQUALITY: MULTIPLE EXCLUSIONS IN LAW AND LEGAL DISCOURSES ii FALLACIES OF EQUALITY AND INEQUALITY: MULTIPLE EXCLUSIONS IN LAW AND LEGAL DISCOURSES Contents Profile iii Acknowledgments v Dedication viii I. Introduction 1 II. Laying the Basis: Fundamental Concepts 3 A. Rights 3 B. Human Rights 4 1. Normative Renditions 4 2. Critique of Rights 6 C. Equality 7 D. Discrimination 9 III. Intersectionality and Multiple Exclusions 11 A. What is intersectionality/Multiple Exclusions? 11 B. Intersectionality and Multiple Exclusions in Kenya’s Constitution 12 C. Utilitarianism or Intuitionism? 13 IV. The Fallacies of Equality 15 A. Subjects of Law 15 1. States in International Law 15 2. Gender 18 (a) Elective and Appointive Positions 19 (b) Employment 20 (c) Ownership and Inheritance of Land 21 i FALLACIES OF EQUALITY AND INEQUALITY: MULTIPLE EXCLUSIONS IN LAW AND LEGAL DISCOURSES 3.
    [Show full text]