A survey commissioned by the Kenya Human Rights Commission (KHRC) to ascertain public awareness of human rights has revealed a widespread reluctance to report incidents of alleged torture to officials in the East African country.
The study, carried out by the Steadman Group — a Nairobi-based research organisation — surveyed 2Â 466 people.
Forty-seven percent of respondents said they would not report incidents of alleged torture, while 40% were willing to do so. The remaining 13% were uncertain how to proceed when confronted with evidence of torture. Results of the survey, which was conducted from February 23 to March 4, were released on April 22 in the Kenyan capital, Nairobi.
In February this year, Kenyan human rights groups also presented a report to the United Nations Human Rights Committee alleging extensive torture by authorities under the National Rainbow Coalition (Narc) government, which came to power in December 2002 pledging to uphold human rights. (The Human Rights Committee is responsible for monitoring the implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights by states which have signed up to this treaty.)
Incidents cited by the groups included the death of 14 prisoners in Meru, eastern Kenya, apparently as a result of being assaulted with blunt objects.
Certain activists believe matters will only improve once the country’s new constitution has been adopted, as this document explicitly outlaws torture. At present, Kenya is governed by a constitution drawn up before the country gained independence from Britain in 1963.
“In order for respect of human rights to be achieved, the constitution review process must be concluded immediately. The government must show its commitment to this process by taking the lead and delivering the much awaited new constitution as fast as possible,” said Wanjiku Miano, executive director of the KHRC.
But, although President Mwai Kibaki promised that a new constitution would be in place within 100 days of him assuming office, the review process has been marred by disputes and stalemates. These stem from the fact that the draft constitution, prepared by the Constitution of Kenya Review Commission, trims presidential powers and provides for the creation of a prime minister’s post — this to prevent a repeat of previous abuses by the executive.
One of the parties in Narc, the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), supports a reduction in presidential powers. LDP member and Public Works Minister Raila Odinga was reportedly promised the post of prime minister in exchange for throwing his weight behind Kibaki in the 2002 election.
For its part, the National Alliance Party of Kenya (NAK), another coalition partner that includes several allies of the head of state, is vigorously opposed to cutting presidential powers.
Initially, parliament was obliged to accept or reject the draft constitution in its entirety, without making any alternations to the document. However, a bill has since been passed that gives legislators the power to amend sections of the new constitution — raising fears that parliament could be used to preserve the interests of NAK.
Any changes to the draft would also serve to undermine the work of the National Constitutional Conference (NCC), which brought together more than 600 delegates from various walks of life in Kenya to debate the document drawn up by the Constitution of Kenya Review Commission. This draft was based on extensive discussions with Kenyans on the form they wanted their country’s new constitution to take. (The NCC formally adopted the draft constitution in March 2004.)
“We want to ensure that parliament does not dilute gains made in the draft, including those touching on torture,” said Paddy Onyango, executive director of the Citizens’ Coalition for Constitutional Change, at the launch of the KHRC survey.
“We are planning a parallel assembly by civil society organizations to deliberate on the way forward in regard to the constitution, based on the draft passed by the delegates,” he noted further, saying Kenyans would also be mobilized to lobby against changes to the draft.
In addition, activists would like to see the creation of a South African-style truth and reconciliation commission to address past instances of torture in Kenya. South Africa’s government set up a truth commission in 1995 in a bid to address the human rights abuses that occurred under apartheid. Those who testified to the commission about violations they had committed stood to gain amnesty for their crimes.
Calls for a similar body to be set up in Kenya began in earnest after rooms in Nairobi’s Nyayo House that had been used for torture were opened to the public in 2003. Under former president Daniel arap Moi, in power from 1978 to 2002, political opponents real and perceived were abused and maimed at Nyayo House. Rights groups estimate that thousands of people passed through the building’s torture chambers.
Two years ago, a task force was appointed by Kenya’s government to solicit the views of Kenyans on the need for a truth commission. It found that 90% of people interviewed supported the creation of a ‘Truth, Justice and Reconciliation Commission’ — or TJRC.
However, the findings of the task force now appear to have been shelved.
“We need the government to establish the TJRC urgently as recommended by the task force formed to investigate the possibility of such a commission. Through this, Kenyans will find healing and will be able to deal with historical injustices,” said Harun Ndubi of Kituo Cha Sheria, a legal aid organisation based in Nairobi. — IPS