Search results

In a ruling that is important beyond Kenya, the Kenyan High Court has delivered a milestone judgment. By striking down a provision of the Kenyan Criminal Code on subversion, the Court takes a significant step towards further doing away with the colonial legacy in the Kenyan legal system. The judgment exemplifies how judges in postcolonial contexts interpret the law against the backdrop of the country's history.

The Kenyan President and his parliamentary allies are guilty of constitutional vandalism. In what has become an increasingly popular political move, they conveniently blame the judiciary for their unfulfilled promises, making the courts an easy target in a democracy backsliding. Lacking public outreach – judges neither organise rallies nor post on social media –, the judiciary has become a scapegoat to rally political support. While courts aren't beyond criticism, some attacks are self-serving, often from those with pending or impending court cases.

In 2010, Kenyans adopted a new constitution that was meant to limit the power of the presidency and entrench the culture of constitutionalism. However, the past 13 years have shown that 'the forces of authoritarianism appear to have regrouped and are staging a comeback'. These attempts have been met with resistance from Kenyan citizens, who have shown that they are willing to defend their constitution. One example of this resistance is the BBI case, in which the High Court struck down a constitutional amendment bill that would have given the president more power. This week, the High Court issued another spectacular ruling in which presidential power is further curtailed.