POLITICAL BULLYING AND ITS IMPACT ON JUSTICE.

Since the promulgation of the new constitution in August 2010, Kenyans have witnessed a rejuvenated judiciary with many changes. With that came monumental happenings that will go in the annals of the history of this nation. First we witnessed the departure of Ms Nancy Baraza as the deputy chief justice when she was found to have pinched the nose of a security guard.

Then came the general elections last year and the Supreme Court had to deliver its judgement after Raila Odinga contested the results. The former prime minister later was quoted in the media dismissing the court’s judgement and alleging bias.

Next we witnessed the departure of Mrs.Gladyss Boss Shollei as the Chief registrar of the judiciary and the ensuing political drama and statements. The fiasco that followed between the Judicial Service Commission, the Executive and Legislature to date has not been resolved. The LSK the other day accused the president of refusing to gazette the 25 judges the JSC appointed.

           

Recently came the impeachment of Embu governor Mr.Wambora.Consequently,he moved to the high court in Kerugoya to challenge the senate’s impeachment(The court will rule on 10^th March 2014 whether he will remain in office pending the hearing and determination of his suit.)What followed like in the above three incidents I have highlighted was an outbreak of aggressive statements from some senators and members of parliament on the presumed erroneous constitutional ruling, tantamount to saying that ‘’we know which law to be applied and what should be the correct ruling.’’ There  were as well simple populists statements such as ‘’separation of powers’’ and some to the effect that the judiciary has gone back to the era of corruption and being controlled by militias and drug barons who roam free in its hallowed corridors.

The judiciary has also been threatened by parliament to be ‘’dealt with’’ by reducing the budgetary allocations to the judiciary in the next financial year. There has been talk of amending the Vetting of Judges and Magistrates Act to have all those judges and magistrates appointed after the promulgation of the new constitution in 2010 to be vetted. Parliament has also warned of tabling a motion to discuss the conduct of individual judges and the judiciary. They also want the president to decline to gazette the twenty five judges the Judicial Service Commission appointed recently.

Yet there is nothing inherently wrong with politicians making statements about the judiciary and criticising it. The judiciary is not and must not be immune from criticism and Judges should not be placed in an enclave like an ivory tower, clothed in sheaths to stop the sharp arrows of criticism. Politics is always present and it will be an irrational dream to postulate its total elimination from legal and constitutional justice. A Utopian dream which could become counter-productive for the constitutional justice as noted by Polish law professor Marek Safjan in his paper Judges and Constitutional Courts;A Personal Perspective published by the European University Institute in 2008.

 

However, the political bullying and attendant political noise being witnessed currently should not be confused with open, fair public debate and external criticism akin to that by a free media to bring accountability to the judiciary or to rein in on the arbitrariness of certain judges. This political bullying is pathological especially that it has crossed the acceptable levels in a democratic society. For instance, it will help   in undermining the status of the courts in the eyes of the public opinion. The courts and the judiciary at large will be viewed as weak, ineffective and lacking in impartiality and independence.

 

It also sends the wrong message that certain people like politicians are not liable for their decisions and cannot be asked to account. It means that the rule of law is relative and dependent upon certain factors. In effect, the society will get the impression that the courts are not the best forum to solve disputes and they should only do so if it suits their interests. Incidents of citizens assaulting police officers, invading private property etc stem from the reinforcement of such messages. What follows is a total disrespect for the rule of law and a society that is ungovernable.

 

Our politicians have consistently disregarded the rule of law for political expediency. Political bullying has been their stock in trade; the average citizen like me may have cheered them on depending on which political noise is musical. The consequences might be subtle for now but in the long term, we will breed a society with total disregard for the rights of minority groups and vulnerable amongst us, social and religious intolerance and lack of awareness of the rule of law etc.

Therefore, our politicians including the president and his deputy need a Politicians Guide to the Rule of Law to read while on this train to destination Anarchy. Hoping they might just stop midway after reading it. But will they listen? Finally we simple wan anchi must also know that politicians come and go but the rule of law endures.

 

 

 

MENTAL HEALTH STIGMATISATION IN KENYA

In his column in the Sunday Nation of February 2^nd 2014(Mentally ill deserve equal job opportunities) and on the 9^th February 2014(Mental Health needs a high-profile advocate) Dr. Lukoye Atwoli brings to the fore the problem of stigmatisation of people with mental disorders in Kenya.

 

The Kenya National Commission on Human Rights notes  in its 2011 report titled Silenced Minds:The Systemic Neglect of Mental Health System  in Kenya that  there is little community awareness about mental health,leading to confusion about what constitutes mental disorder,mental illness,personality disorder,intellectual disability e.t.c. The Commission says in its report that stigmatization was identified as the critical factor that led to the rebranding of Mathari Mental Hospital to Mathari Hospital.The word ‘’mental ‘’ itself was considered stigmatizing.

Last week while watching a talk show on a local television station where two guests were debating the cases before the International Criminal Court, one of them to hammer the point home that his opponent was perhaps lying, chose to call him a ‘‘mental case’’.The other one replied by saying he had never been to Mathari or any other mental hospital. And the talk show host laughed uproariously. Of course the words might have been said in jest. The words seemed innocuous and added the much needed drama to the show. But reflectively, they portray the lack of awareness and subsequent stigmatisation when it comes to mental health. What comes to the minds of many people when mental illness is mentioned is the image of a haggard and violent man who should only be kept at a place like Mathari or be left to roam the streets, homeless.

 In many Kenyan communities mental health is still mainly associated with witchcraft. Traditional healers are sought and most patients end up not getting proper medication, worsening the situation instead. The situation is compounded in places where there is also rampant drug abuse, for instance Malindi. Today, we also have a mushrooming of churches and this has resulted in a messy mushroom soup as author John Mbiti put it. The dubious preachers ‘’heal’’ all manner of ailments including mental disorders which according to them are simply the work of the devil.

 

The International Institute for Legislative Affairs also notes in its October 2011 digest that mental health unfortunately still carries stigma due to ignorance and/ or social-cultural beliefs about mental health. B ecause of this stigma, many people hesitate to get help for a mental health problem for fear of being looked down upon. This stigma is partly propagated by the media because people with mental disorders are, many times, not described accurately or realistically in the media. News stories sometimes highlight mental illness to create a sensation in a news report. Since the media plays a critical role in shaping the perceptions and opinions of Kenyans it is imperative that it remains sensitive and accurate when reporting about mental health issues. Doing the opposite will only help in propagating the stigma associated with mental illness.

 

When the most vulnerable members of a society are neglected, their specific needs are overlooked. It becomes also difficult to assist in their re-integration into all aspects of community life, thus improving their overall quality of life. Successive governments’ policies and practices have also helped in marginalising mental health and in essence discriminating against persons suffering from mental disorders. This is the time therefore for the digital government to rise to the occasion and bring the sorely needed changes. Otherwise it will not count much if we drill oil and build nice railway lines and super highways yet the vulnerable members of the society are still neglected and their constitutional rights are violated.

The Mental Health Act is outdated and not in line with international standards and the Kenyan constitution and needs to be amended accordingly. But still, Kenya is a perfect example that existence of legislation does not necessarily guarantee the protection of people with mental disorders. Political will is lacking and mental health issues are not taken with the seriousness they deserve.Therefore, political will is much needed to move forward.

 

VULNERABILITY AND RADICALISATION OF THE KENYAN YOUTH.

                               VULNERALBE KENYAN YOUTH AND RADICALISATION

In 2009, a bitter leadership feud erupted at the Riyadha Mosque in Nairobi’s Majengo area when young Muslims violently took over the management of the mosque and several-income generating ventures, ousting a committee of elderly people. The leader of the young people who led this takeover was later to go underground and resurface in a video recording sent to a local media house claiming to have joined al-Shabaab.There were allegations that the government turned a blind eye and gave a deaf ear to complaints by parents that their children were being radicalised at the mosque then.

In May 2012, men dressed as police officers arrested Samir Khan,a deputy of Aboud Rogo,and his mutilated body was found days later in a national park.Rogo met a similar fate in August 2012 when he was shot by unknown assailants. In both incidents the Kenyan security forces were accused of extra-judicial killings.

In November 2012,Kenyan non-muslim youth rioted in response to a grenade attack in Eastleigh,attacking Muslims and their businesses.Then lately on 2^nd February  this year,we witnessed police officers perched on a mosque’s minaret with guns, battling  it out with youths  following claims of a radicalisation session that was going on that Sunday at the Masjid Musa mosque in Majengo.Hundreds were arrested including minors.We were shown weapons including a gun  allegedly recovered.Sadly,deaths occurred.

 

 After the latest incident in Majengo, Mombasa, the expected responses by the police on the one hand and the muslim community on the other hand followed. The police were defensive and tried to justify why they resorted to the use of force to disperse the young men from the mosque.The muslim community mainly condemned the police for committing a sacrilegious act of storming the mosque with their dirty police boots.At the same time,there were denunciations of radicalism and a call for the government to go after those preaching extremist jihad ideology.There was talk of freedom of religion as well.

 The above few examples highlight the Kenyan government’s approach to the problem of the vulnerability of Kenyan youth to radicalisation and extremism, the perception of the muslims by the non muslims in Kenya and the approach of the various organisations representing muslims in Kenya to this menace of radicalisation.

None of the parties attempted to identify the drivers of radicalisation and offer a solution.Questions such as what causes the youth to be susceptible to radicalistaion,and what can be done to end it.These are seemingly  simple questions yet they require brutally sincere answers that can only be answered if there is an open debate by both parties,that is the government and the larger muslim community through its organisations like the National Union of Kenya Muslims,the Young Muslim Association,the Islamic Foundation,the Muslim Education and Welfare Associatipon,the Council of Imams and Preachers of Kenyathe National Muslim Leaders Forum,and the umbrella body the Supreme Council of Kenya Muslims.

The starting point obviously is by the muslim community accepting that there is radicalisation going on in some of the mosques as evidently pointed out in the media when rowdy vulnerable youth took over the Masjid Musa mosque to propagate their extremist jihad ideology last year .The government on its part must acknowledge that its approaches have been so far counter-productive and should change tact.

The next step would be to identify the causes of radicalisation.An interplay of political,social -economic,personal identity,Kenyan identity and religious factors lead the vulnerable youth to radicalisation. For instance,the  history of Kenya as a nation has contributed to the radicalisation that leads many youths to to join exterimist groups. The MRC at the coast and the atrocities committed during the Shifta war come to my mind.Political marginalisation is one of the problems being exploited to fan radicalism. Unless everyone feels a part of this nation through politics of inclusion then the problem will not go away.Any real or perceived inequality in terms of distribution of resources and availability of employment opportunities have also significantly contributed to radicalisation.

Although it has been found that not all who become radicalised come from poor backgrounds, poverty is a motivating factor that is used by the radical preachers to recruit the vulnerable youth.A government that does not provide the basic needs of healt,education,security and shelter cannot have the support of its citizens it has neglected.The radical preachers through dubious charitable organisations provide the basic needs and fill the void left by the government. Poverty is then politicised to the advantage of the extremists.

Prison has also been found to be a recruitment ground and it is imperative that even as the government takes the youths to court with a view to convicting and eventually sending them to prison, it should note that most of them might come out more radicalised and even leave prison with converts. There is need therefore to monitor those radicalised inmates and even after they serve their sentences.

Also, even as it seeks to have them prosecuted in court it should always ensure that due process, rule of the law and constitutionality are upheld. Otherwise the police will fast become part of the  problem.

And to all those who run to the constitution, they must know from the outset that there has to be distinction between people who are genuinely worshipping in mosques and anywhere else for that is their constitutional right, and those people who are motivated by extremist agenda and want to exploit such places of worship for their own selfish agenda including recruitment.

And as noted by Anneli Botha in her publication in Institute for Security Studies paper 245, we must hear the candid and forceful voice of the moderate Muslims; otherwise the general perception among the non-Muslim society will be that the acts of the extremists represent Islam. The Kenyan non Muslim society like the world over views Muslims as ‘’terrorists’’, this has led to the marginalisation of the muslim youth who are guilty of terrorism until proven otherwise, this has led them to have no option but to join the extremist movements since they have already been labelled as ‘’terrorists’’. There must be change in attitude for those of us who do not understand Islam as a religion.