Karua loses round one in case against Waiguru; 28.09.2017

By GEORGE MUNENE
More by this Author

Narc Kenya leader Martha Karua on Thursday lost a bid to have an election petition she has filed against Kirinyaga Governor Anne Waiguru be heard by a three-judge bench.

Kerugoya High Court Judge Lucy Gitari said the application by the petitioner lacked merit.Anti-riot police on standby outside the Kerugoya law courts as the High Court delivers ruling in petition filed by Martha Karua on September 27, 2017. PHOTO | GEROGE MUNENE | NATION MEDIA GROUP

Justice Gitari said the court has powers to hear an election petition of that nature and determine it.

"This court has been constituted by the Chief Justice to hear election disputes and one Judge is enough to hear the petition against the respondent," she said.

She also noted that the case was not complex or raised substantial question of law and as such it did not require three judges to handle it.

ANTI-RIOT

Immediately after the court's verdict, Ms Karua's lawyers Ndegwa Njiru and Noami Wanja applied that their client be supplied with a copy of the ruling for perusal.

Ms Waiguru's lawyers Kamotho Waiganjo and Andrew Karani welcomed the ruling and declared that they were ready to proceed with the hearing of the petition.

Anti-riot police were on standby as the judge read the ruling.

During hearing of the application, Ms Karua had submitted that her petition was of immense public interest and that it was not necessary to set up a bench to hear it.

She also argued that the matter was weighty and it should be handled and determined by more than one Judge.

ORDINARY

But Ms Waiguru disagreed with Ms Karua's argument saying that the petition was an ordinary one and that it could easily be heard and concluded in one week and it does not warrant the constitution of a bench.

Ms Karua argues that Ms Waiguru was not validly elected as governor and her election should be declared null and void.

She noted that the Supreme Court set a precedent when it nullified the presidential elections and its decision should apply to all other polls.

She claimed the elections were marred with voter bribery and that her agents were locked out of polling stations.

She alleged that ballot boxes were tampering with and forgery of ballot papers were widespread during the August 8 polls.

Ms Waiguru won the gubernatorial seat with 161,373 votes while Ms Karua got 122,091 votes.

Article 3 Petition

Why this is important

The Chief Justice of Kenya
Supreme Court Building of Kenya
City Hall Way
P.O. Box 30041 – 00100
Nairobi, Kenya

PETITION TO THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF KENYA CONCERNING DISSOLUTION OF PARLIAMENT PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 261 (7) OF THE CONSTITUTION OF KENYA 2010 ON CONSEQUENTIAL LEGISLATION

WHEREAS the Supreme Court of Kenya in Advisory Opinion No. 2 of 2012 advised that Parliament that the constitutional deadline to enact legislation to implement Article 81(b) was 27th August 2015;

WHEREAS the 11th Parliament was sworn in on 28th March 2013;

WHEREAS despite the provisions of the Constitution, including among others, Articles 2, 3, 10, 27, 28 73, 81, 94, 261 and the Fifth Schedule; Parliament on at least two occasions failed to pass a law to implement Article 81(b) and thereby comply with the deadline advised by the Supreme Court Advisory Opinion 2 of 2012 as well as required by the Constitution;

WHEREAS On 29th March 2017 in Petition No. 371 of 2016 the High Court ordered that “…if Parliament fails to enact said legislation within the said period of SIXTY (60) DAYS from the date of this order, the Petitioners or any other person shall be at liberty to petition the Honourable the Chief Judge to advise the President to dissolve Parliament.” [Centre for Rights Education and Awareness & another v Speaker of National Assembly & 5 others [2017] eKLR]

WHEREAS despite the High Court order of March 29th, 2017 Parliament nevertheless refused, failed and/or neglected to comply with the Constitution and Orders of the High Court and pass legislation to implement Article 81(b);

WHEREAS on 8th August 2017 there was a general election as provided in the Constitution;

WHEREAS despite the swearing in of the 12th Parliament on 31st August 2017 and the subsequent election of Speakers, neither house has provided any indication of an intention to prioritize the enactment of Article 81(b) legislation to purge the non‐compliance with the Constitution and superior court orders.

WHEREAS Parliament is also under an obligation to enact legislation to ensure the inclusion of marginalized groups per Article 100 among them women, persons with disabilities, youth and ethnic minorities and has failed, refused and or neglected to act in accordance with the Constitution;

WHEREAS the Constitution provides in Article 2(1) “This Constitution is the supreme law of the Republic and binds all persons and all State organs at both levels of government” and Article 3(2) that “Any attempt to establish a government otherwise than in compliance with this Constitution is unlawful.” and

WHEREAS Article 261(7) provides that:
(7) If Parliament fails to enact legislation in accordance with an order under clause (6) (b), the Chief Justice shall advise the President to dissolve Parliament and the President shall dissolve Parliament.

WE THE UNDERSIGNEDTHEREFORE, by this petition and in exercise of our obligations under Article 3(1) “to respect, uphold and defend this Constitution”.

HEREBY REQUEST that you immediately invoke your constitutional authority pursuant to Articles 261 (7) and in accordance with Articles 1, 2, 3 and 10, among others and advise the President that:

1. Parliament is in default of the Court Orders issued by the High Court in Petition No. 371 of 2016, and in violation of the timelines set out by the Supreme Court in Advisory Opinion No. 2 of 2012 and in further violation of the constitutional timelines provided for the enactment of legislation to implement Articles 81(b) and 100;
2. Parliament is in violation of the explicit provisions of Article 3(2) “Any attempt to establish a government otherwise than in compliance with this Constitution is unlawful.”
3. Due to the foregoing failures, Article 261 (7) compels you to advise the President to dissolve Parliament forthwith and thereby uphold the sovereignty of the people as enshrined in the Constitution of Kenya 2010.

Respectfully,

@WeAre52pc #WeAre52pc

Nasa supporters to stage demos at UN in New York; 29.09.2017

By CHRIS WAMALWA
More by this Author

From left: Nasa leaders Musalia Mudavadi (Amani), Moses Wetang'ula (Ford-K), Raila Odinga (ODM) and Kalonzo Musyoka (Wiper). Their supporters in the US are set to fundraise for Nasa campaigns. PHOTO | FILE | NATION MEDIA GROUP. 

Summary

• They said the demos at the UN would begin at 11am and end in the afternoon with an international press conference.
• After New York, they said they would move to New Jersey for the Nasa Diaspora USA Party to be held at Ukranian Hall, 1700 Brooks Blvd, Hillsborough, NJ 08844, from 7pm to 2am.
• They said the event in the evening was also to act as a fundraiser for Nasa campaigns.
• Meanwhile, Nasa USA supporters are calling on the Kenyan government to immediately re-instate the security detail of Mr Odinga and Mr Musyoka.

Supporters of the National Super Alliance are planning a major demo at the United Nations headquarters in New York on Saturday.

The protests, the organisers say, are aimed at bringing to the attention of the international community, events unfolding in Kenya since the annulment of the August 8 presidential election.

SECURITY

Speaking to the Nation in Philadelphia, the organisers—Dr George Omburo (US Diaspora chairman), Amos Atonga and Debra Akello— said the goings-on in Kenya since the annulment of the poll was cause for alarm and the international community needed to pay special attention as the country prepares for a repeat of the poll.

“Right now you are seeing the government withdraw security details for Mr Raila Odinga and his running mate Kalonzo Musyoka, unleashing Mungiki on innocent demonstrators in the streets of Nairobi and the president himself vilifying and trying to undermine the Judiciary because they ruled against him,” they said in a statement.

“The situation in Kenya right now as we speak is very tense and fragile. That’s why we are having events this coming Saturday in New York and New Jersey to bring attention to these issues while celebrating the historical ruling that has made Kenya a harbinger of democracy in Africa.”

Related Content

• Nasa supporters stage demos - PHOTOS
• Raila reacts to security withdrawal
• Kalonzo says his security withdrawn

FUNDRAISER

They said the demos at the UN would begin at 11am and end in the afternoon with an international press conference.

After New York, they said they would move to New Jersey for the Nasa Diaspora USA Party to be held at Ukranian Hall, 1700 Brooks Blvd, Hillsborough, NJ 08844, from 7pm to 2am.

They said the event in the evening was also to act as a fundraiser for Nasa campaigns.

Meanwhile, Nasa USA supporters are calling on the Kenyan government to immediately re-instate the security detail of Mr Odinga and Mr Musyoka.

In a statement to the Nation, Mr Odinga’s supporters based in the US and Canada said if anything untoward happened to the opposition leader, President Kenyatta’s administration would be held accountable.

PRIVATE

“A presidential candidate is a president in waiting, he must be protected. That is why we, members of Nasa USA condemn in the strongest terms possible this desperate and ignorant action by the Jubilee administration to withdraw security detail of a leading Kenyan presidential candidate, Mr Raila Odinga and his running mate Mr Kalonzo Musyoka,” the statement signed by Mr Jack Ambuka of New Jersey read in part.

Nasa supporters said Mr Odinga, as a presidential candidate, was no longer running for office as a private citizen or like any other candidates who may need to make private security arrangements.

Rather, they said,  he was doing so on behalf of the entire country.

They said Mr Odinga was a national project that must be protected by national security instruments.

BODYGUARDS

“Protecting a presidential candidate is not a new phenomenon that is exclusive to Kenya. It is a precedent set and adhered to by countries in the whole world. Unfortunately, in Kenya, virtually every government decision is made either at the alter of tribe or on the pulpit of political chicanery. No decision is based on objectivity or pragmatic approach. By withdrawing security detail of Raila Odinga and his running mate, the government is in essence telling the duo that it doesn’t care what happened to them even if they get assassinated." Mr Ambuka said.

“In fact, withdrawing security is equivalent to inviting and preparing the ground for assassins to carry out their evil responsibility with less or no difficulties at all.”

Mr Odinga’s Mr Musyoka’s bodyguards were withdrawn on Monday evening.

JUBILEE

The officers were recalled to General Service Unit headquarters in Nairobi on the eve of planned demos against the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC).

The demos went on as planned in Nairobi and Kisumu but Mr Odinga, Mr Musyoka and other top officials of the Nasa coalition did not participate.

Mr Odinga said the move by the government to deny him state protection was part of a wider scheme to cause harm to opposition leaders.

The opposition leaders’ supporters asked  President Kenyatta in his capacity as the commander-in-chief of the armed forces to rescind the decision immediately and order reinstatement of Mr Odinga’s and Mr Musyoka’s security detail.

“God forbid something happens to Raila and or Kalonzo, Jubilee administration will bear the blame,” they said in a statement.

Election law changes: The summary; 29.09.2017

By JOHN NGIRACHU 
More by this Author

The National Assembly. Nasa MPs stormed out of the chamber to protest changes to poll laws. FILE PHOTO | JEFF ANGOTE | NATION MEDIA GROUP

Summary

• If there is a discrepancy between the manual and electronically transmitted results, the manual shall prevail.
• A failure to transmit the results electronically shall not be used to invalidate the result.
• It requires the commission to announce the result only when it has all the forms.

The Jubilee Party is on course to change election laws before repeat presidential election is held on October 26 amid protests and boycott by opposition.

The National Assembly, controlled by the ruling party, has formed a special committee to scrutinse the proposed changes.

POWERS

Here are some of the amendments President Kenyatta’s party is pushing for:

On the chairman: The Election Laws (Amendment) Bill 2017 drops the requirement that the chairperson be a person who is qualified to hold the office of judge of the Supreme Court under the Constitution. This removes the requirement that the chairman be a lawyer.

— It provides for the vice-chairman to automatically become the head of the commission in the absence of the chairman.

Related Content

• Jubilee marches on with poll law change
• House fast-tracks two election Bills
• IEBC talks collapse - VIDEO

— If both the chairman and the vice-chairman are absent, the commissioners present can elect one of themselves to act as chairman.

On the commission: The Bill reduces the quorum of the commission from five to half of the existing members but not less than three.

— If there is no unanimity on a decision, matters would be decided by a majority of the commissioners present and voting.

On the management of a presidential election: The bill provides for concurrent electronic and manual transmission of tabulated results from polling stations to the constituency and national tallying centre, publish the result forms in a public portal.

— If there is a discrepancy between the manual and electronically transmitted results, the manual shall prevail.

— A failure to transmit the results electronically shall not be used to invalidate the result.

— It requires the commission to announce the result only when it has all the forms.

— It also requires the commission to develop a complementary system.

— Result forms cannot be declared void if they are not in line with the prescribed format as long as the deviation is not designed to mislead.

— Petitioner will be required to prove there were irregularities in the conduct of an election and how those irregularities affected the final result

If a presidential election is annulled: The IEBC will be required to publish a notice indicating that no candidate was elected, announce a date for the fresh election and publish the names of those to participate within seven days.

—Candidates to participate will be determined by the nature of the petitioner. If it was the runner-up, it will be him versus the president-elect, and if by more than one candidate, then those candidates and the president-elect. If the petitioner was not a candidate then all candidates would participate.

— If there are only two candidates and one withdraws, then the one remaining will be declared to have been elected unopposed.

On offences: Election Offences (Amendment) Bill 207 says any presiding officer and returning officer who knowingly fails to sign or fill completely result forms, submit incomplete forms or change or falsify them will serve five years in jail without the option of a fine.

Nasa meets to fill House seats; 28.09.2017

By IBRAHIM ORUKO
More by this Author

By SAMWEL OWINO
More by this Author

From left: Nasa leaders Musalia Mudavadi (Amani), Moses Wetang'ula (Ford-K), Raila Odinga (ODM) and Kalonzo Musyoka (Wiper). They will lead today's PG. PHOTO | FILE | NATION MEDIA GROUP. 

Summary

• Mr Odinga has since termed the leaked list as a rumour, saying the coalition will agree on the final one either at the PG or one of its planned retreats.
• On Wednesday, Mr Mbadi noted that the other  would  be agreed on during the PG today.

The leadership of the opposition National Super Alliance in the National Assembly and the Senate will be the main agenda today as the coalition meets to finalise its list. 

The parliamentary group meeting to be held at the offices of Wiper party— a member of Nasa alongside ODM, Amani National Congress and Ford-Kenya— will be addressed by the coalition leaders Raila Odinga, Kalonzo Musyoka and Musalia Mudavadi.

LEAKED LIST

Nasa has already settled on Bungoma Senator Moses Wetang’ula (Ford Kenya) and Suba South MP Mr John Mbadi (ODM) as minority leaders in the the Senate and the National Assembly.

However, a leaked list that includes Lugari MP Ayub Savula (ANC) as Mr Mbadi’s deputy, Kathiani MP Robert Mbui (Wiper) as minority whip,  Kiminini MP Chris Wamalwa (Ford-Kenya) as his deputy in the National Assembly caused jitters, with Coast MPs led by Msambweni MP Suleiman Dori (ODM) threatening to leave Nasa.

However, Ugunja MP Opiyo Wandayi urged opposition MPs to concentrate on the October 26 fresh presidential election instead of being consumed on who should be on the list.

“The bigger picture for us at this moment is to deliver votes to our presidential candidate, the rest can be dealt with later,” Mr Wandayi said.

WIPER

In the Senate, Siaya Senator James Orengo (ODM) has been mentioned as Mr Wetang’ula’s deputy, Makueni Senator Mutula Kilonzo Junior (Wiper) as minority whip with Ms Petronilla Were (ANC) as his deputy.

Mr Odinga has since termed the leaked list as a rumour, saying the coalition will agree on the final one either at the PG or one of its planned retreats.

On Wednesday, Mr Mbadi noted that the other  would  be agreed on during the PG today.

Mr Mbui said Wiper party has no problem with the list.

“As Wiper we have no problem with the list. I want to advise our ODM colleagues that there are many other positions in the committees and PSC that they can get. For this House leadership positions, it is only fair that they are shared with all coalition partners,” Mr Mbui said.

SPLIT

On Tuesday, National Assembly Speaker Justin Muturi told the leadership of Nasa to ensure that the minutes endorsing the list are attached to the letter formally notifying the speaker of the coalition’s decision. 

An ODM MP, who did not want to go on record, noted that if what was leaked were to remain the same, the leadership of Public Accounts Committee, Public Investments Committee and that of committee on implementation should then go to the Coast MPs.

“There has to be balance within the party and the region,” the MP said.        

Even as the push and pull goes on, Ugunja MP Mr Opiyo Wandayi (ODM) and Nambale’s Mr Sakwa Bunyasi (ANC) have been mentioned as favorites to head the Public Accounts Committee.

Mr Dori is also tipped to chair the Public Investments Committee as part of concessions that Nasa has to make to accommodate the Coast lawmakers.

Both PAC and PIC are watchdog committees in the National Assembly. They are equally highly political seats and therefore require strong leadership.

Kajiado Central MP Mr Elijah Memusi (ODM) and Malindi’s Ms Aisha Jumwa (ODM) could get slots in the parliamentary service commission.

WANGA

Homa Bay Woman Representative Gladys Wanga may forego her position in the parliamentary service commission as she comes from the same region as Mr Mbadi.

On Wednesday, differences in the opposition played out on the floor of the National Assembly as the House was notified of a proposal to create a special committee to consider the Supplementary Budget.

This emerged after Dr Wamalwa asked the Speaker to provide direction on what would happen in the absence of the Opposition MPs in the committee named by Majority Leader Aden Duale.

Mr Duale said he had spoken to Mr Mbadi, who stated that he would have to consult Mr Odinga on the matter.

“Hon Mbadi is still looking for Baba at Capitol Hill or Okoa Kenya or that other office,” said Mr Duale as he expressed his readiness to add to the list of the Opposition provides the names.

SAVULA

But Mr Savula, who had been named as deputy minority leader before the list was contested, differed with the Nasa position.

He said the Speaker should abide by the list read out by Mr Mbadi at the induction workshop before Nasa Chief Executive Norman Magaya said there had been no agreements.

“Ayub Savula is the deputy minority leader and things are not going to change. We are going to consult and give you names by the end of the day,” Mr Savula said.

But the Speaker told him the Opposition would have to abide by the Standing Orders, which require that the letter by the Minority Whip on the leadership be accompanied by the minutes.

“You have expressed a desire to be the deputy. I would really urge that we can resolve that matter so that the House can operate as a House.”

Uhuru to Maraga: Please explain your decision on poll

By KENNEDY KIMANTHI
More by this Author

President Uhuru Kenyatta and his Deputy William Ruto. He accuses the apex court of subverting the will of the people. PHOTO | PSCU 

President Kenyatta now wants the Supreme Court to explain how it arrived at its decision to quash his re-election.

Mr Kenyatta on Thursday said the reasons given by the four judges who, in a majority decision, nullified August 8 presidential poll were “unsatisfactory”.    

EVIDENCE

Addressing the nation from State House Nairobi, Mr Kenyatta said the apex court failed to consider evidence that was presented his lawyers and those representing the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission.

The president seemed to tap the opinion of Justice Njoki Ndung'u, who, in her dissenting decision, accused her colleagues of failing to evaluate the voluminous forms and other evidence presented by lawyers.

Judge Ndung'u said while mistakes might have marred the August poll, they could not warrant nullification of the election.

Related Content

• Uhuru terms court decision as ‘coup’
• IEBC off the hook
• What happened to 2013 precedent? Judge Ndung'u asks
• Ojwang’: Nasa claims broad and vague

Mr Kenyatta maintained his and Jubilee Party’s claim that the will of the people was subverted by the judges.

'COUP'

Mr Kenyatta on Thursday morning termed the judgement issued on Wednesday as judicial “coup”.

However, the the Head of State said while he disagrees with the judges’ decision, he would respect it.

He directed Parliament to address any ambiguities in law that may have arisen from judgment.

Jacob Mulaku

ABOLISH PARTY PRIMARIES ALTOGETHER

The just concluded party primaries are an indication of an ailing democracy in a country whose population believes in democratic governance.
Going by the number of aspirants seeking to vie for elective posts as independent candidates in the coming general elections, and the outcry by Kenyans on both social and main media, one gets this feeling that the primaries were not democratic, not free, not fair and therefore not credible.
With this trend, in order to achieve a fully democratic country where the will of the people is respected, and have political parties owned by majority Kenyans and not just a few individuals, we need to change our approach towards elections and party membership process, procedure, rules and regulations.
Political parties in Kenya as it stands today belong to a few minorities with majority of Kenyans being recruited into parties either knowingly or unknowingly just to foster the selfish interests of the people who parties belong to.
Kenyans have learned through blackmail and coercion to join parties not because these parties represent their interests but because they identify with certain top individuals in the parties or simply because they have been brainwashed to believe that the parties are regional or tribal forums through which they can put forth their bargain in national politics. Are political parties in Kenya today promoting democracy or they are simply tribal and regional entities?
It is time we put stop to this if we envisage a growing democracy, where political parties belong to members and not party officials, a democracy where majority win, a democracy where people are free to join parties for what they stand for and not because who they belong to or which tribal and regional interests they represent.
For us to achieve this, we must change our elections process in Kenya which will change the way parties recruit their members. The process might sound radical but it’s the best way to ensure that the will of the people is respected; political parties are given back to the people and unite this country without having regional or tribal parties. This will not only see us track back to a culture of cultivating democratic practices at all levels of leadership elections, but also see the marginalized and the minority groups having a chance of ascending to power in this country for what they believe in and what they have to offer to move the country forward, and not be denied opportunity of leadership because they come from a marginalized minority.

This informs my proposal that;
a) We abolish party primaries/nominations and instead have all aspirants down from the MCAs up to the Governorship contest in general elections, and of course this should come with stringent measures, rules and regulations from the election’s body to enlist only serious contenders, people of integrity and leadership qualities able to represent the people at the elective level they intend to represent them.
b) That after their election, the MCAs, MPs, Women Reps, Senators,Gorvernors,through scrutiny of various party manifestoes and in discussion with their constituents, shall affiliate themselves to political parties prior to swearing in within 3 months of election.
c) That upon affiliation, one shall abide by the rules and regulations of the party and be guided by the principles of the party and what the party stands for and shall be subject to disciplinary which shall include but not limited to fines, suspension and expulsion upon negating on the party rules and regulation.
d) That one shall be free to change affiliation, but upon which one shall have to resign from his/her elective position and seek fresh mandate from the electorate before joining another party. This shall also apply to a member who through fair and due process is expelled from his affiliate party by way of disciplinary action for going against the principles of the party.
e) That for one to vie for any elective position except the presidency, one must not be a member of any political party at the time of registration by the electoral body until such a time after elctions,and one shall never be sworn into office unless he/she affiliates himself/herself to a political party.
f) That after the elections of the MCAs up to the Governors, but before their swearing in, a due process under the regulations of the electoral body be in place for the nomination of presidential candidates by political parties at least 3 months to the presidential elections. The presidential election must take place within 3 months after the lower election and presidential candidates nominating parties must have been duly registered at least 6 months prior to the nominations.

Jacob M Mulaku

Western Kenya secession bid moves to the High Court; 18.09.2017

By BENSON MATHEKA
More by this Author

According to the petitioners, the territorial jurisdiction of King Nabongo Mumia of Wanga spread from Jinja in present-day Uganda to Kijabe to Susua in Kenya. The Wanga Kingdom is not party to the case filed at the High Court. PHOTO | FILE | NATION MEDIA GROUP  

Summary

• According to the petitioners, the colonial government declined to heed to demands by the Abaluhya community to have their own kingdom during the Lancaster House Talks in the United Kingdom that led to Kenya’s Independence in 1963.
• It is the petitioners’ case that the Luhya community was part of Uganda and their land was given to the then British East African Protectorate, now Kenya, against their wish.
• “The official representatives of the dominant group occupying the Eastern Province of Uganda being the entire Abaluhya Community comprising the Wanga Kingdom voiced their concern in writing of their planned merger,” Mr Mwilitsa states in an affidavit.

The agitation for parts of Kenya to secede has moved to the High Court with two residents filing a petition seeking the autonomy of western Kenya.

In the petition filed at the Constitutional Division of the High Court, Mr Mathew Okwanda Mwilitsa and Mr Alex Misigo Matisa are asking the court to let the people of what used to be Eastern Province of Uganda under the colonial rule to decide their political future in a referendum.

ABALUHYA KINGDOM

“The petitioners are personally and on behalf of their community urging the honourable court to be pleased to grant the people occupying the territory formerly known as the Eastern Province of Uganda leave to hold a referendum so as to exercise their right to determination in terms of their rights to nationality, territorial integrity, economic, social and culture as a people,” the petition states.

They have sued the governments of Uganda, Kenya and Britain for destabilising the once united Abaluhya kingdom.

Mr Mwilitsa is from  Kakamega County while Mr Matisa lives in Vihiga County.

NABONGO MUMIA

“The inhabitants of the former Eastern Province of Uganda were between the years 1895 – 1962 a distinct, cohesive, homogeneous and a united community under the able leadership of their King Nabongo Mumia, whose territorial jurisdiction spread from Jinja in present-day Uganda to Kijabe with the boundary being at Susua in the then British East Africa Protectorate (now Kenya),” the petition further states.

According to the petitioners, the colonial government declined to heed to demands by the Abaluhya community to have their own kingdom during the Lancaster House Talks in the United Kingdom that led to Kenya’s Independence in 1963.

It is the petitioners’ case that the Luhya community was part of Uganda and their land was given to the then British East African Protectorate, now Kenya, against their wish.

LANCASTER CONFERENCE

“The official representatives of the dominant group occupying the Eastern Province of Uganda being the entire Abaluhya Community comprising the Wanga Kingdom voiced their concern in writing of their planned merger,” Mr Mwilitsa states in an affidavit.

He argues the said merger was meant to destroy their cultural and social fabric, which was well knit under the leadership of the able king of the Abaluhya.

Though the Abaluhya leaders voiced their concern in writing to the Lancaster House Conference Talks on Kenya’s Independence in 1960, their pleas have been ignored to date by subsequent governments.

“The merger of the former Eastern Province of Uganda with the British East Africa Protectorate was illegal, and the same violated the United Nations Charter and the United Nations Governing Assembly Resolution No. 1514 (XV) of 14 thDecember, 1960.

DISCRIMINATION

“The Government of the United Kingdom by design failed to resolve the Abaluhya Question when it was in a position to do so before granting independence  to the British East Africa Protectorate; and therefore liable to pay reparations for the anguish and sorrow suffered by the said community to date,” the petition states.

Since the merger and after independence, the petition says Luhyas suffered severe discrimination, and victimisation in job allocation and general development funding.

“The community has similarly been marginalised economically, socially, culturally and politically  and in the end the community has been given a derogatory tag as being ‘professional  cooks and watchmen’”.

THE UK

The petitioners are asking the court to compel the Government of the United Kingdom to pay reparations to the Abaluyia Community for randomly and arbitrarily placing them in Kenya, and for failing to resolve their question and petition before granting independence to the former East Africa Protectorate, now Kenya.

They want the court to declare that the inhabitants of  the former Eastern Province of Uganda are at liberty in making their free choice of their territorial integrity without external force or intimidation and that Article 15 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights on the right to nationality, self-determination and territorial integrity applies to their petition.