popular constitutionalism and the future

8/19/2019 Popular Constitutionalism and the Future

1/17

POPULAR CONSTITUTIONALISM AND THE FUTURE OF CAPITAL

PUNISHMENT IN KENYA.

by Wanyama I. George.1

1 Undergrad.LLB.finalist CUEA Law School


2/17

1. Introduction.

Humans prefer living in association with others because it’s only then that ‘individual material

needs, spiritual desires and cultural aspirations are developed more richly.’2That people merely

associate is inadequate because for the purposes of human association to be fully realised, this

coming together must be to deliberately create a government.3The problem with governments

however is that it is large and complex therefore all adult citizens can’t regularly assemble to

enact the laws that will maintain social order.4The solution has been to nominate people and to

delegate to them the authority to make laws applicable within a state.5

The weight of delegated

authority has to be considerable and discretionary for government to be effective.6Logically,

this creates the need for citizens, as original delegators of power, to have some form of indirect

supervision over the decisions made by government.7

Constitutions are devices that evolved to serve this citizen’s desire to indirectly supervise

government because traditionally, their main purpose has been to constitute the state.

Consequently, Constitutions have been defined as “written or unwritten body of rules that

determine the structure and the limits on government powers”8.The content and form of

Constitutions that create the state depends on the unique character of the society it is supposed

to govern.8

2 The idea of the social contract goes back, in a recognizably modern form, to Thomas Hobbes; it was developed

in different ways by John Locke, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, and Immanuel Kant.3 Harvey, J& Bather, L (1968) THE BRITISH CONSTITUTION.St Martin Press. New York.pg1-54 Waluchow, W. J. (2007) "A Common Law Theory of Judicial Review," American Journal of Jurisprudence:Vol. 52: Issue. 1, Article 12.pg.15. http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ajj/vol52/iss1/12 5 Hobson C (2008) Revolution, Representation and Foundations of Modern Democracies European Journal of

Political Theory.Vol.7.Issue4.6 ibid7 Alphonse Marie Louis de Prat de Lamartine (1848) France and England: a Vision of the Future

http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=ien.35556032610594 8

see the 34th

Amendment of the Constitution of Ireland via referendum to allow for same sex marriage whencontrasted with Kenya’s constitution amendments expressly excluding the same from the legitimate forms of

marriage vide Art.45COK

http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ajj/vol52/iss1/12http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ajj/vol52/iss1/12http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ajj/vol52/iss1/12http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=ien.35556032610594http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=ien.35556032610594http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=ien.35556032610594http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=ien.35556032610594http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ajj/vol52/iss1/12http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ajj/vol52/iss1/12


3/17

2. Background to the research.

The existence of capital punishment in Kenya’s criminal justice system is a divisive issue.

While it’s long been established that public opinion may favour its use9the government is under

constant pressure to make the current moratorium on hangings into actual law aganist the death

penalty. 10 Parliament is debating a private members bill to abolish the death penalty by

amending the laws that legalize the application of capital punishment domestically.12One of the

main arguments raised during parliamentary debate is that capital punishment is immoral,

ineffective as a deterrent and has failed to adequately restore victims of crimes for which it is

prescribed. Indeed, statistics show violent crimes in all regions of Kenya is on the rise in spite

of society’s knowledge of the existence of capital punishment.13Research also reveals that the

failures of our criminal justice system in not providing a strong deterrent to potential violent

offenders is so bad that it has been linked to Kenya’s culture of extrajudicial killings.11This rise

of violent crime along with the new threat of domestic terrorism has pushed public policy

arguments demanding that the state hang capital offenders as a deterrent to potential offenders

because some offences are too grave and only the death sentence can assuage the loss.12 The

Kenyan Supreme Court is also currently hearing a constitutional petition that wants it to declare

that the use of mandatory death sentences unconstitutional and therefore illegal.

9 Novak, A (2011) Constitutional Reform and the Abolition of the Mandatory Death Penalty in Kenya Suffolk

UL Rev.Vol.45. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1791323 10 Schabas ,W(2003) Abolition of Capital Punishment from International law Perspective 3 rded.Cambridge

Univ.Press 12 Ngirachu ,J(Daily Nation, Friday 19th June 2015) ‘MP Proposes Bill to Abolish death

penalty’http://mobile.nation.co.ke/news/-/1950946/2757386/-/format/xhtml/item/1/-/dke47iz/-/index.html 13Odongo W & Ngethe ,V(Daily Nation ,July 7th 2015)Robberies, sex crimes and murders on the rise

http://www.nation.co.ke/news/Crime-Statistics-Kenya-Nation-Newsplex/-/1056/2778984/-/q0m3ud/-

/index.html 11 KNCHR (2008)The Cry of Blood’: Report on Extra Judicial Killings and Disappearances

http://www.ediec.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Kenia/KNCHR_REPORT_ON_POLICE.pdf 12 Lord Denning’s memorandum to the Royal Commission on Capital Punishment (1953) RCCP Cmd 8932 at

pgI8 “…………..The punishment inflicted for grave crimes should adequately reflect the revulsion felt by the

great majority of citizens for them .... The ultimate justification of any punishment is not that it is a deterrent, butthat it’s emphatic denunciation by the community of a crime.”

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1791323http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1791323http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1791323http://mobile.nation.co.ke/news/-/1950946/2757386/-/format/xhtml/item/1/-/dke47iz/-/index.htmlhttp://mobile.nation.co.ke/news/-/1950946/2757386/-/format/xhtml/item/1/-/dke47iz/-/index.htmlhttp://mobile.nation.co.ke/news/-/1950946/2757386/-/format/xhtml/item/1/-/dke47iz/-/index.htmlhttp://www.nation.co.ke/news/Crime-Statistics-Kenya-Nation-Newsplex/-/1056/2778984/-/q0m3ud/-/index.htmlhttp://www.nation.co.ke/news/Crime-Statistics-Kenya-Nation-Newsplex/-/1056/2778984/-/q0m3ud/-/index.htmlhttp://www.nation.co.ke/news/Crime-Statistics-Kenya-Nation-Newsplex/-/1056/2778984/-/q0m3ud/-/index.htmlhttp://www.ediec.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Kenia/KNCHR_REPORT_ON_POLICE.pdfhttp://www.ediec.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Kenia/KNCHR_REPORT_ON_POLICE.pdfhttp://www.ediec.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Kenia/KNCHR_REPORT_ON_POLICE.pdfhttp://www.ediec.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Kenia/KNCHR_REPORT_ON_POLICE.pdfhttp://www.nation.co.ke/news/Crime-Statistics-Kenya-Nation-Newsplex/-/1056/2778984/-/q0m3ud/-/index.htmlhttp://www.nation.co.ke/news/Crime-Statistics-Kenya-Nation-Newsplex/-/1056/2778984/-/q0m3ud/-/index.htmlhttp://www.nation.co.ke/news/Crime-Statistics-Kenya-Nation-Newsplex/-/1056/2778984/-/q0m3ud/-/index.htmlhttp://www.nation.co.ke/news/Crime-Statistics-Kenya-Nation-Newsplex/-/1056/2778984/-/q0m3ud/-/index.htmlhttp://www.nation.co.ke/news/Crime-Statistics-Kenya-Nation-Newsplex/-/1056/2778984/-/q0m3ud/-/index.htmlhttp://www.nation.co.ke/news/Crime-Statistics-Kenya-Nation-Newsplex/-/1056/2778984/-/q0m3ud/-/index.htmlhttp://www.nation.co.ke/news/Crime-Statistics-Kenya-Nation-Newsplex/-/1056/2778984/-/q0m3ud/-/index.htmlhttp://www.nation.co.ke/news/Crime-Statistics-Kenya-Nation-Newsplex/-/1056/2778984/-/q0m3ud/-/index.htmlhttp://www.nation.co.ke/news/Crime-Statistics-Kenya-Nation-Newsplex/-/1056/2778984/-/q0m3ud/-/index.htmlhttp://www.nation.co.ke/news/Crime-Statistics-Kenya-Nation-Newsplex/-/1056/2778984/-/q0m3ud/-/index.htmlhttp://www.nation.co.ke/news/Crime-Statistics-Kenya-Nation-Newsplex/-/1056/2778984/-/q0m3ud/-/index.htmlhttp://www.nation.co.ke/news/Crime-Statistics-Kenya-Nation-Newsplex/-/1056/2778984/-/q0m3ud/-/index.htmlhttp://www.nation.co.ke/news/Crime-Statistics-Kenya-Nation-Newsplex/-/1056/2778984/-/q0m3ud/-/index.htmlhttp://www.nation.co.ke/news/Crime-Statistics-Kenya-Nation-Newsplex/-/1056/2778984/-/q0m3ud/-/index.htmlhttp://www.nation.co.ke/news/Crime-Statistics-Kenya-Nation-Newsplex/-/1056/2778984/-/q0m3ud/-/index.htmlhttp://www.nation.co.ke/news/Crime-Statistics-Kenya-Nation-Newsplex/-/1056/2778984/-/q0m3ud/-/index.htmlhttp://mobile.nation.co.ke/news/-/1950946/2757386/-/format/xhtml/item/1/-/dke47iz/-/index.htmlhttp://mobile.nation.co.ke/news/-/1950946/2757386/-/format/xhtml/item/1/-/dke47iz/-/index.htmlhttp://mobile.nation.co.ke/news/-/1950946/2757386/-/format/xhtml/item/1/-/dke47iz/-/index.htmlhttp://mobile.nation.co.ke/news/-/1950946/2757386/-/format/xhtml/item/1/-/dke47iz/-/index.htmlhttp://mobile.nation.co.ke/news/-/1950946/2757386/-/format/xhtml/item/1/-/dke47iz/-/index.htmlhttp://mobile.nation.co.ke/news/-/1950946/2757386/-/format/xhtml/item/1/-/dke47iz/-/index.htmlhttp://mobile.nation.co.ke/news/-/1950946/2757386/-/format/xhtml/item/1/-/dke47iz/-/index.htmlhttp://mobile.nation.co.ke/news/-/1950946/2757386/-/format/xhtml/item/1/-/dke47iz/-/index.htmlhttp://mobile.nation.co.ke/news/-/1950946/2757386/-/format/xhtml/item/1/-/dke47iz/-/index.htmlhttp://mobile.nation.co.ke/news/-/1950946/2757386/-/format/xhtml/item/1/-/dke47iz/-/index.htmlhttp://mobile.nation.co.ke/news/-/1950946/2757386/-/format/xhtml/item/1/-/dke47iz/-/index.htmlhttp://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1791323http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1791323


4/17

3. Statement of the problem.

There are fundamental legal rights that a Kenyan enjoys that cannot be limited by the state or

anyone else even if the Constitution has been legitimately suspended.

13

The right to life is not

one of these non-derrogable rights14opening the way for laws that limit this right as punishment.

Indeed when an examination of existing Kenyan statutes reveal intra-judicial killings are

reserved for crimes that represent a breach of the social contract in the worst possible ways.

Case in point, the Kenya Defence Forces Act15 prescribes death as punishment for armed forces

personnel who wilfully undermine the security of our nation.16The Penal Code also allows for

the application of mandatory death sentences17for specific crimes.18

The controversey in our criminal justice system is that firstly, successfully prosecuted capital

offenders aren’t getting hanged because the president maintains a tradition started by his recent

predecessors of refusing to sign death warrants necessary for executions to happen.19The

current moratorium on all executions is in itself an affront to the entrenched constitutional

doctrine of Rule of Law20and is based on a misapplication of the law. The Constitution may

vest the executive the prerogative of mercy21 but this power isn’t absolute nor discretionary.22It

is expected that prisoners on death row can use the Mercy Committee to petition for

clemency.23The president is legally obligated to follow the recommendations of this statutory

body to pardon a successful petitioner and change their death sentence to a lesser punishment.

13 Art 25 when read with Art 24 and Art 58COK14 Art26(3)COK15 Act No.25of.2012.LOK16 S.58,S59(1)(a),S.61(2)(a),S.62(2)(a),S.63(a),S.67,S72and S.73 Act No.25of2012.LOK17 S.25.Penal Code of Kenya.Cap63LOK when read with S69.Prisons Act Cap.90LOK18 For Murder, treason, robbery with violence, attempted robbery with violence and oaths for illegal purposes.19 S.330, 331, and 332 Criminal Procedure Code.CAP.75 LOK20 Art 10(a)COK21

Art133COK22 ibid.23 S.19 Act No.21of 2011


5/17

For those who the committee rejects their clemency petitions, the law obligates the state to kill

them.24

Secondly, as long as the illegal moratorium exists, the number of death sentences issued will

remain disproportionate to the actual number of executions.25This situation guarantees those

condemned to hang will languish in fortified cells26indefinitely congesting our prisons.27Aside

from the mental anguish these condemned prisoners go through, their families are also at a loss

as to whether they should continue with their lives as if their relative was dead or hold up the

hope that their relative will live on.28

Third, the illegal moratorium symbolises a state that doesn’t respect the limits imposed on it by

law. The danger here is that if a culture is encouraged where corporate will 29starts overriding

the general will of Kenyan’s collective sovereign, it will become a government that operates

through arbitrary rule.30 No doubt an appreciation of how parliament was used to entrench

arbitrary rule in Kenya’s past no doubt influenced the framers of our Constitution to use

popular constitutionalism as the way of protecting our young democracy from a return to

arbitrary rule.31Popular constitutionalism means citizens have an active continuous role in the

constitutional amendment process. It is based on the rationale that Constitutions are devices to

24Art133(1)COK when read with S.20-25 of Act No.21of 201125 Lydia Matata, (The Star) Kenya imposes death sentences but not carrying out executions

http://www.thestar.co.ke/news/kenya-imposes-death-sentences-not-carrying-out-executions-report#sthash.jRFseQra.dpuf 26 S.36APrisons Act .Cap.90LOK.27 Chris Masitta (2014) KENYA PRISONS: TOWARDS PRIVATIZATION OF AN AILING PENAL

SYSTEM. Vol.2 KUSL. Rev.Issue128 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1 OF 2013 eKlr http://kenyalaw.org/caselaw/cases/view/84083 where it was

opined“.....We cannot say much about it now because it is time the Supreme Court made a determination toguide all and by all we mean the courts, the convicts, lawyers, prosecutors, victims or their relatives, scholars

and the wider public generally. It is of concern to all these categories that the status and applicability of the

death sentence is made clear, certain and final, if not all the time, for the time being.”29Bertram,C(2004) Rousseau and the Social Contract, London: Routledge “…..(g)overnments (though not

sovereign) have a life and therefore its own ego and a leadership that can desire to make general will secondary

to its corporate will.”30

Korwa,G &Munyae,I(2001)Human Rights Abuses in Kenya 1978-2001http://www.africa.ufl.edu/asq/v5/v5i1a1.pdf 31 Art.1COK

http://www.the-star.co.ke/news/kenya-imposes-death-sentences-not-carrying-out-executions-reporthttp://www.the-star.co.ke/news/kenya-imposes-death-sentences-not-carrying-out-executions-reporthttp://www.the-star.co.ke/news/kenya-imposes-death-sentences-not-carrying-out-executions-reporthttp://www.the-star.co.ke/news/kenya-imposes-death-sentences-not-carrying-out-executions-reporthttp://www.africa.ufl.edu/asq/v5/v5i1a1.pdfhttp://www.africa.ufl.edu/asq/v5/v5i1a1.pdfhttp://www.africa.ufl.edu/asq/v5/v5i1a1.pdfhttp://www.africa.ufl.edu/asq/v5/v5i1a1.pdfhttp://www.the-star.co.ke/news/kenya-imposes-death-sentences-not-carrying-out-executions-reporthttp://www.the-star.co.ke/news/kenya-imposes-death-sentences-not-carrying-out-executions-reporthttp://www.the-star.co.ke/news/kenya-imposes-death-sentences-not-carrying-out-executions-reporthttp://www.the-star.co.ke/news/kenya-imposes-death-sentences-not-carrying-out-executions-reporthttp://www.the-star.co.ke/news/kenya-imposes-death-sentences-not-carrying-out-executions-reporthttp://www.the-star.co.ke/news/kenya-imposes-death-sentences-not-carrying-out-executions-reporthttp://www.the-star.co.ke/news/kenya-imposes-death-sentences-not-carrying-out-executions-reporthttp://www.the-star.co.ke/news/kenya-imposes-death-sentences-not-carrying-out-executions-reporthttp://www.the-star.co.ke/news/kenya-imposes-death-sentences-not-carrying-out-executions-reporthttp://www.the-star.co.ke/news/kenya-imposes-death-sentences-not-carrying-out-executions-reporthttp://www.the-star.co.ke/news/kenya-imposes-death-sentences-not-carrying-out-executions-reporthttp://www.the-star.co.ke/news/kenya-imposes-death-sentences-not-carrying-out-executions-reporthttp://www.the-star.co.ke/news/kenya-imposes-death-sentences-not-carrying-out-executions-reporthttp://www.the-star.co.ke/news/kenya-imposes-death-sentences-not-carrying-out-executions-reporthttp://www.the-star.co.ke/news/kenya-imposes-death-sentences-not-carrying-out-executions-reporthttp://www.the-star.co.ke/news/kenya-imposes-death-sentences-not-carrying-out-executions-reporthttp://www.the-star.co.ke/news/kenya-imposes-death-sentences-not-carrying-out-executions-reporthttp://www.the-star.co.ke/news/kenya-imposes-death-sentences-not-carrying-out-executions-reporthttp://www.the-star.co.ke/news/kenya-imposes-death-sentences-not-carrying-out-executions-reporthttp://www.the-star.co.ke/news/kenya-imposes-death-sentences-not-carrying-out-executions-reporthttp://www.the-star.co.ke/news/kenya-imposes-death-sentences-not-carrying-out-executions-report


6/17

create modern democratic societies where government is accountable to its citizens32not just

another statute our parliament can amend as it wishes.33 The crisis in Kenya’s criminal justice

system on the question of capital punishment is therefore caused by our government’s

corporate will not to execute34and its simultaneous avoidance of a constitutional obligation to

ascertain the public opinion on the matter.35

4. The implications of popular constitutionalism on the legality of Kenya’s mandatory

death sentences.

Legal constitutionalism is founded on English constitutional doctrine of parliamentary

sovereignty and the American constitutional doctrine of judicial review. Legal

constitutionalism is the justification for legislatures and judges to amend the Constitution.

Parliamentary sovereignty means only the legislature have the delegated legislative authority

and this power is absolute .Therefore parliament can pass or amend any law it likes since there

is no distinction between the Constitution and statute.36It’s important to note that this doctrine

may have been in operation prior to promulgation of our current grundnorm in 201037 but that

changed vide Art.1.COK.

The doctrine of judicial review was recognized and enforced by the American Supreme Court

in Marbury v. Madison38 where Marshall CJ was of the opinion that”…….it is emphatically

the province and duty of the Judicial Department [the judicial branch] to say what the law is.

Those who apply the rule to particular cases must, of necessity, expound and interpret that rule.

32 Preamble COK when read with Art4, Art 10 ,Art73(1)(b)(c),Art 104 and Art 232 COK33 REPUBLIC v. EL MANN (1969) E.A. 357 where it was held “Principles which govern the construction of

statutes apply to the interpretation of a Constitution.”34 For example, S.4 (2) of the Prevention of Terrorism Act No.30 of 2012 prescribes life imprisonment for

terrorist acts which like the crime of murder in our penal code results in the unlawful killing of innocent

civilians.35 Art.94when read with Art.255 & Art 256 COK.36 Sir. William Blackstone cited in Harvey et al (1968) The British Constitution.at pg. 8.37

Muthomi Thiankolu, Landmarks for el Mann to the Saitoti Ruling; Searching a Philosophy of Constitutionalinterpretation in Kenya. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1601306 38 5 U.S. 137 (1803).

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1601306http://ssrn.com/abstract=1601306http://ssrn.com/abstract=1601306http://ssrn.com/abstract=1601306


7/17

If two laws conflict with each other, the Courts must decide on the operation of each. So, if a

law [e.g., a statute or treaty] be in opposition to the Constitution, if both the law and the

Constitution apply to a particular case, so that the Court must either decide that case

conformably to the law, disregarding the Constitution, or conformably to the Constitution,

disregarding the law, the Court must determine which of these conflicting rules governs the

case. This is of the very essence of judicial duty. If, then, the Courts are to regard the

Constitution, and the Constitution is superior to any ordinary act of the Legislature, the

Constitution, and not such ordinary act, must govern the case to which they both apply. Those,

then, who controvert the principle that the Constitution is to be considered in court as a

paramount law are reduced to the necessity of maintaining that courts must close their eyes on

the Constitution, and see only the law (e.g., the statute or treaty).This doctrine would subvert

the very foundation of all written constitutions.”39

Judicial Review therefore means that Courts of law have the power to test the validity of

legislative as well as other governmental action with reference to the provisions of the

constitution.40Domestically the Kenyan High Court has original jurisdiction, under Article

23(1), to hear and determine applications for redress of a denial, violation or infringement of,

or threat to, a right or fundamental freedom in the Bill of Rights.41In Nancy Makokha Baraza

v Judicial Service Commission & 9 Others 42 the High Court was of the opinion that “…the

New Constitution gives the court wide and unrestricted powers which are inclusive rather than

exclusive and therefore allows the court to make appropriate orders and grant remedies as the

situation demands and as the need arises. Rationally, in a claim of violation of the constitution,

39 N38supra at 177 – 78. 40 Ochiel J Dudley(2015) THE CONSTITUTION OF KENYA 2010 AND JUDICIAL REVIEW: WHY THEODUMBE CASE WOULD BE DECIDED DIFFERENTLY TODAY http://kenyalaw.org/kenyalawblog/the-

constitution-of-kenya-2010-and-judicial-review-odumbe-case/#sthash.Yau63A9D.dpuf 41 Ibid.42 Constitutional petition NO. 23 OF 2012.

http://kenyalaw.org/kenyalawblog/the-constitution-of-kenya-2010-and-judicial-review-odumbe-case/#sthash.Yau63A9D.dpufhttp://kenyalaw.org/kenyalawblog/the-constitution-of-kenya-2010-and-judicial-review-odumbe-case/#sthash.Yau63A9D.dpufhttp://kenyalaw.org/kenyalawblog/the-constitution-of-kenya-2010-and-judicial-review-odumbe-case/#sthash.Yau63A9D.dpufhttp://kenyalaw.org/kenyalawblog/the-constitution-of-kenya-2010-and-judicial-review-odumbe-case/#sthash.Yau63A9D.dpufhttp://kenyalaw.org/kenyalawblog/the-constitution-of-kenya-2010-and-judicial-review-odumbe-case/#sthash.Yau63A9D.dpufhttp://kenyalaw.org/kenyalawblog/the-constitution-of-kenya-2010-and-judicial-review-odumbe-case/#sthash.Yau63A9D.dpuf


8/17

the court has sufficient power to grant any appropriate remedy including an order of judicial

review.43

The framers of the Kenyan Constitution opted to fuse legal and popular constitutionalism. This

was done by first creating the expectation that government will always follow the law.44Then

the Constitution envisions that out of practical necessity parliament may amend the

Constitution.45However government is prohibited from amending our Constitution using the

legislative means if said amendments touch the existing constitutional provisions in our Bill of

Rights46or Sovereignty of the people.47 Therefore the only legitimate way of making the Right

to life non derrogable and the death penalty inapplicable domestically is via referendum. Not

through judicial decisions nor statute.

Literature Review.

Donnelly challenges universalism claims attached to human rights by observing ‘….cultural

relativism is an undeniable fact because moral rules and social institutions are different.’48 The

central argument ofthe doctrine of cultural relativism is that human societies evolve differently

therefore their norms will vary. Since laws reflect each society’s conception of what are

fundamental rights retained by citizens when they join civil society the classification of private

rights as fundamental will also vary. Ugochukwu49observes that in all postcolonial African

43 See Art.22COK44KEVIN K MWITI & OTHERS V KENYA SCHOOL OF LAW & 2 OTHERS CONSTITUTIONALPETITION NUMBER 377 OF 2015(CONSOLIDATED WITH PETITION NO 395 OF 2015 & JR NO 295 OF

2015) where Odunga J opined ‘Under Article 10 of the Constitution, some of the national values and principles

of governance which bind State organs, State officers, public officers and all persons when enacting, applying orinterpreting any law or making or implementing public policy decisions included equality and non-

discrimination. Hence, if the said guidelines were promulgated with a view to avoid an interpretation of the Act

whose effect would have led to a violation of the said values and principles, then, the decision to do so was 45 Art 94(3)when read with Art 255(e)COK46 Ch4.COK47 Art1COK48 Jack Donnelly (1984) Cultural Relativism and Universal Human Rights, Human Rights Quarterly. Volume. 6,

No. 4. pp. 400-419. http://www.jstor.org/stable/762182?&seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents 49 Ugochukwu,,Basil(October 12, 2010), 'Africanizing' Human Rights in Africa: Nigeria and KenyaConstitutions in Context http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1691004

http://www.jstor.org/stable/762182?&seq=1http://www.jstor.org/stable/762182?&seq=1http://www.jstor.org/stable/762182?&seq=1http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1691004http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1691004http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1691004http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1691004http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1691004http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1691004http://www.jstor.org/stable/762182?&seq=1


9/17

countries, our legal systems are governed by borrowed definitions of human rights norms. No

effort has been made to ‘Africanize ’human rights at the national level in most African nations.

Ugochukwu therefore argues that African Customary law can be used to expand understanding

of human rights on the continent or even create norms unique to the African. 50His opinion is

that discourse on human rights in Africa is wrongly frozen in the universalism versus cultural

relativism argument. Citing Professor Abdullah an Na’im51, Ugochukwu argues there is the

need for the promotion of local capacity in order to improve the human rights condition in

Africa. Such an effort must build on what actually exists on the ground without attempting to

impose norms and models developed elsewhere as part of a neo-colonial exercise in cultural

imperialism unlikely to be sustainable in practice.

Garland52observes that for the past few decades, the most significant global trend has been the

movement towards the abolition of the death penalty. Johnson and Zimring53, observe this

movement has coincided with a global push towards democracy. Neumayer 54 therefore

concludes that the global abolitionist movement isn’t completely altr uistic because it is driven

by political factors. Prof.Schabas points out that the abolition of capital punishment was one of

the objectives identified by the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights55as a goal for

‘civilized societies’. His opinion therefore is that there is a prima facie justification to claim

that death penalty abolition qualifies as emerging Jus Cogens because of the numerous

50 Ibid.51Prof. Abdullahi Ahmed An- Na’im, (2003) Expanding Legal Protection of Human Rights’ in African Contexts,

in Abdullahi Ahmed An- Na’im (ed.) HUMAN RIGHTS UNDER AFRICAN CONSTITUTIONS: REALIZING

THE PROMISE FOR OURSELVES.52 Garland, D (2011)’Modes of capital Punishment: The Death Penalty in Historical Perspective’ in Garland et

al, America’s Death Penalty: Between Past and Present, NYU Press at 61.53 Johnson T.D &Zimring E.F (2009). The Next Frontier: National Development, Political Change and the

Death Penalty in Asia. OUP.54 Naumayer, E (2008) ‘Death Penalty: The Political Foundations of the global trend towards abolition,’ Human

Rights Review 9.55 UNDHR (1948). www.kenyalaw.org :See Second Optional Protocol on Abolition of Death penalty(1989)

http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/2ndOPCCPR.aspx

http://www.kenyalaw.org/http://www.kenyalaw.org/http://www.kenyalaw.org/http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/2ndOPCCPR.aspxhttp://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/2ndOPCCPR.aspxhttp://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/2ndOPCCPR.aspxhttp://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/2ndOPCCPR.aspxhttp://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/2ndOPCCPR.aspxhttp://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/2ndOPCCPR.aspxhttp://www.kenyalaw.org/http://www.kenyalaw.org/


10/17

multilateral treaties outlaw capital punishment.56 Rodley57concurs with abolitionists that the

death sentence is by and large inhumane however the problem is that within the existing regime

of international treaties, capital punishment is recognised as a way of derogating the Right to

Life. Benner 58 provides a compromise by arguing that the American method that doesn’t make

death penalties mandatory and limiting it to the most serious crimes is the best way forward.

Professor Ntanda-Nsereko59observes that support for the death penalty within African countries

is rooted in indegenous customs and culture that demand for particularly reprehensible crimes

such as murder death is the only fitting punishment. Scott60highlights the weakness of this kind

retributivist thinking is that it struggles to explain why an offender should be punished, what

form that punishment should take, or why the government should be given the power to inflict

pain as remedy. His views are influenced by Hegel’s61critique of retributivism that argues pain

cannot redress the impact of criminal conduct because wrongs can’t be undone by a subsequent

wrong.

Boonin’s62 problem with retributivism’s forfeiture of rights doctrine is that it threatens due

process because of the inherent danger of the immoral punishment of the innocent. 63To

Golash64the reprobation doctrine in retributive justice is that it’s faulty because it’s doubtful

whether governments have the kind of close relationships with wrongdoers similar to blood ties

56 Schabas, W (2003) Abolition of Capital Punishment from International law Perspective 3 rd Ed. CUP.57 Rodley, N.S (2008) the Treatment of Prisoners of War under International Law.3rdEd.OUP.58 Benner, S (2002) Death penalty; An American History. In The Florida Historical Quarterly.Vol 82, No.4(2004), pp. 507-509. http://www.jstor.org/stable/30149972 59Prof. Nsereko (1986) ‘Capital Punishment in Botswana’, United Nations, Crime Prevention and Criminal

Justice Newsletter, pg.1260 Scott D (2009) Justifications of punishment and questions of penal legitimacy in Hucklesby A and Wahidin A

(eds) Criminal Justice 2ndEd, OUP. at pp12661 Hegel, G (1896) Philosophy of Right. http://www.gwfhegel.org 62 Boonin, D (2008).The Problem of Punishment. New York: Cambridge University Press

http://assets.cambridge.org/97805218/83160/frontmatter/9780521883160_frontmatter.pdf 63

ibid64 Golash, D.(2005)The Case Against Punishment: Retribution, Crime Prevention, and the Law .Journal of Legal

Education .Vol. 55, No. 3 pp. 401-406 http://www.jstor.org/stable/42893918

http://www.jstor.org/stable/30149972http://www.jstor.org/stable/30149972http://www.jstor.org/stable/30149972http://www.jstor.org/stable/30149972http://www.gwfhegel.org/http://www.gwfhegel.org/http://www.gwfhegel.org/http://assets.cambridge.org/97805218/83160/frontmatter/9780521883160_frontmatter.pdfhttp://assets.cambridge.org/97805218/83160/frontmatter/9780521883160_frontmatter.pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/42893918http://www.jstor.org/stable/42893918http://www.jstor.org/stable/42893918http://www.jstor.org/stable/42893918http://www.jstor.org/stable/42893918http://www.jstor.org/stable/42893918http://www.jstor.org/stable/42893918http://assets.cambridge.org/97805218/83160/frontmatter/9780521883160_frontmatter.pdfhttp://assets.cambridge.org/97805218/83160/frontmatter/9780521883160_frontmatter.pdfhttp://www.gwfhegel.org/http://www.gwfhegel.org/http://www.jstor.org/stable/30149972http://www.jstor.org/stable/30149972http://www.jstor.org/stable/30149972


11/17

where reprobation is most effective. To Murphy65 the just deserts doctrine in retributive justice

is faulty because we live in an unequal society where people do not get what they deserve.

Therefore the idea that punishments redress consequences created through crime is flawed

because crimes are a symptom of socio-economic problems. Braithwaite and Pettit’s66 solution

to these weaknesses of retributive justice is the principle of parsimony, in which they argue that

to achieve equality in criminal justice systems, there should be provisions that the guilty can

be punished or granted mercy depending on each crime’s mitigating circumstances.

To Scott67utilitarian/consequentialist obsession with the maximisation of human happiness

leaves their arguments vulnerable. Firstly, their arguments create an obligation to prove

empirically that specific punishment is or isn’t effective in reducing future crimes. Second, by

judging the effects of punishment purely upon its wider consequences, utilitarians can’t answer

the issue of whether the potential punishment of innocent people would still bring overall

human happiness in the manner retributivists like Winters68 have done. Thirdly, it has no

safeguards to ensure that the severity of the sentence is proportional to the harm done, it is

possible for excessively harsh punishments to be invoked for relatively minor

offences. 69 Scott’s fourth concern is that offenders are denied their dignity when made

inanimate statistics by consequentialist theory in order to become a means subservient to the

purposes of another.70

To Honderich71

the incapacitation argument in consequentialist justice theory just postpones

the repetition of crimes with the offender having a greater propensity to offend upon release

65 Murphy, J.G (1973) ‘Marxism and Retribution’. Philosophy & Public AffairsVol. 2, No. 3 at pp. 217-66 John Braithwaite& Philip Pettit (1991) Not Just Deserts: A Republican Theory of Criminal Justice. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2381738 67 N52.supra.68Winters, PA (1997) The Death Penalty Opposing Viewpoints. San Diego, CA: Green Press Inc. pg. 4269

N60 supra70 N60 supra71 Honderich, T(2006) Punishment: The Supposed Justifications Revisited,Pluto.London

http://www.jstor.org/stable/2381738http://www.jstor.org/stable/2381738http://www.jstor.org/stable/2381738http://www.jstor.org/stable/2381738


12/17

back into society. Honderich believes that imprisonment has ‘crime capacitating effects’, in

that it actually gives rise to desires for new wrongs in convicts to the extent they undertake

more dangerous or heinous acts in the future after release. 72 Golash 73 points out that relying

only on incapacitation is very expensive in practice. The cost of incapacitating enough capital

offenders to have an impact of lowering crime rates is expensive for Kenya or any other

government for that matter.74

To Hudson75the rehabilitation angle in consequentialist justice portrays crime as symptoms of

a social illness but this isn’t always the case. To Hudson, crime is a social construction therefore

murderers are not a special class of person unfairly prone to criminal behaviour. By focusing

on the offender instead of the ‘crime’, rehabilitation is too positivist in its denial of human

agency and moral choices as mitigating factors. Hudson points out that rehabilitation has the

potential to be unfair or could undermine an offender’s procedural rights since rehabilitative

sentences may be indefinite for the express purpose of facilitating the transformation or cure of

an offender.76

According to Golash77 the deterrence argument in consequentialist justice is irrelevant to the

reasons why most people refrain from criminal behaviour. The reasons are usually unconnected

to knowledge of criminal law. He observes that the segment of society with strong social ties,

support networks, access to emotional and material resources, are likely to be intimidated by

the penal law, because they have alot to lose while the people who are already stigmatised,

72 Rael Jelimo (The Star, March 4 th 2015) Recently Released Convict Kills Girlfriend in Kapsabet.Standard

Newspaper. http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/thecounties/article/2000153642/recently-released-convict-

killsgirlfriend-in-kapsabet 73 N56.supra. 74Chris Masitta (2014) KENYA PRISONS: TOWARDS PRIVATIZATION OF AN AILING PENAL

SYSTEM. KUSL.Rev. Vol2.no1.75 Hudson, B.A (1996).Understanding Justice: An Introduction to Ideas, Perspectives and Controversies in

Modern Penal Theory. The British Journal of Social Work.Vol.27, No. 1 ,pp. 162-163

http://www.jstor.org/stable/23714627 76 Criminal Appeal No. 118 2011 (2013) and Republic. v.S.A.O. (a minor) (2004) eKLR.77 N.56.supra.

http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/thecounties/article/2000153642/recently-released-convict-kills-girlfriend-in-kapsabethttp://www.standardmedia.co.ke/thecounties/article/2000153642/recently-released-convict-kills-girlfriend-in-kapsabethttp://www.standardmedia.co.ke/thecounties/article/2000153642/recently-released-convict-kills-girlfriend-in-kapsabethttp://www.standardmedia.co.ke/thecounties/article/2000153642/recently-released-convict-kills-girlfriend-in-kapsabethttp://www.jstor.org/stable/23714627http://www.jstor.org/stable/23714627http://www.jstor.org/stable/23714627http://www.jstor.org/stable/23714627http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/thecounties/article/2000153642/recently-released-convict-kills-girlfriend-in-kapsabethttp://www.standardmedia.co.ke/thecounties/article/2000153642/recently-released-convict-kills-girlfriend-in-kapsabethttp://www.standardmedia.co.ke/thecounties/article/2000153642/recently-released-convict-kills-girlfriend-in-kapsabethttp://www.standardmedia.co.ke/thecounties/article/2000153642/recently-released-convict-kills-girlfriend-in-kapsabethttp://www.standardmedia.co.ke/thecounties/article/2000153642/recently-released-convict-kills-girlfriend-in-kapsabethttp://www.standardmedia.co.ke/thecounties/article/2000153642/recently-released-convict-kills-girlfriend-in-kapsabethttp://www.standardmedia.co.ke/thecounties/article/2000153642/recently-released-convict-kills-girlfriend-in-kapsabethttp://www.standardmedia.co.ke/thecounties/article/2000153642/recently-released-convict-kills-girlfriend-in-kapsabethttp://www.standardmedia.co.ke/thecounties/article/2000153642/recently-released-convict-kills-girlfriend-in-kapsabethttp://www.standardmedia.co.ke/thecounties/article/2000153642/recently-released-convict-kills-girlfriend-in-kapsabethttp://www.standardmedia.co.ke/thecounties/article/2000153642/recently-released-convict-kills-girlfriend-in-kapsabethttp://www.standardmedia.co.ke/thecounties/article/2000153642/recently-released-convict-kills-girlfriend-in-kapsabethttp://www.standardmedia.co.ke/thecounties/article/2000153642/recently-released-convict-kills-girlfriend-in-kapsabethttp://www.standardmedia.co.ke/thecounties/article/2000153642/recently-released-convict-kills-girlfriend-in-kapsabet


13/17

impoverished, or socially excluded are less likely to fear further stigmatisation therefore are

most likely to commit crimes. Mathiesen78observes the collective incapacitation aspect of

consequentialist justice theory is dependent on the intended interpretation of criminal sentences

by the general public but this message can be lost because sometimes the most rational act is

to break the law.79

Hobson80argues that the abolitionist movement must be de linked from the democratisation

movement by attaching it to liberalism. This is because liberalism is concerned with the

protection of individual rights and minorities against majority will. Borrowing from the

observations of Zakaria81, Hobson observes that where democratisation happens in a culture

with weak liberal values, it reduces the chances of capital punishment abolition because popular

sentiment to retain capital punishment won’t be overcome easily. Hobson argues that liberal

values can produce liberal institutions that are sufficiently robust for political elites to abolish

the death penalty even if the majority of the people want the status quo to remain intact.100

On the paradox of ignoring the majority will to retain capital punishment in a democracy,

Hobson opinion is it would have only been a problem in a system of direct democracy like

ancient Athens. To him, when democracy reappeared in the 18 th Century Western Europe, it

adopted the indirect form still found today. Therefore legislators and citizens have a trustee-

beneficiary relationship82 because the defining characteristic of true democracy is the mediation

of the popular will against minority opinions in governance and the law making

process. 83Therefore elected politicians as trustees may be expected to follow the general

78Mathiesen, T (1991) Prison on Trial: A Critical Assessment. The British Journal of Criminology.Vol. 31,Issue

No. 3 pp. 308-309 http://www.jstor.org/stable/23637512 79 S.16.CAP63 LOKcompulsion defence &S.17.CAP63LOK Self Defence and defence of property80 Hobson,C(2013) ‘Democracy, Democratization and the Death Penalty’

http://christopherhobson.net/wpcontent/uploads/2013/01/hobson-DDDP-jan-2013.pdf 81 Zakaria, F (2004). The Future of Freedom: Illiberal Democracy at Home and Abroad, Human Rights

Quarterly.Vol. 26, No. 1 at pp. 211-215 http://www.jstor.org/stable/20069723 82 N73supra83 Ibid.

http://www.jstor.org/stable/23637512http://www.jstor.org/stable/23637512http://www.jstor.org/stable/23637512http://christopherhobson.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/hobson-DDDP-jan-2013.pdfhttp://christopherhobson.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/hobson-DDDP-jan-2013.pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/20069723http://www.jstor.org/stable/20069723http://www.jstor.org/stable/20069723http://www.jstor.org/stable/20069723http://www.jstor.org/stable/20069723http://christopherhobson.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/hobson-DDDP-jan-2013.pdfhttp://christopherhobson.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/hobson-DDDP-jan-2013.pdfhttp://christopherhobson.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/hobson-DDDP-jan-2013.pdfhttp://christopherhobson.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/hobson-DDDP-jan-2013.pdfhttp://christopherhobson.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/hobson-DDDP-jan-2013.pdfhttp://christopherhobson.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/hobson-DDDP-jan-2013.pdfhttp://christopherhobson.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/hobson-DDDP-jan-2013.pdfhttp://christopherhobson.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/hobson-DDDP-jan-2013.pdfhttp://christopherhobson.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/hobson-DDDP-jan-2013.pdfhttp://christopherhobson.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/hobson-DDDP-jan-2013.pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/23637512http://www.jstor.org/stable/23637512


14/17

interests of their constituents but they must also consider the interests of all citizens without

being tied to a specific mandate.84Absent of specific mandates, legislators have room to engage

in debate, change their minds and compromise. Therefore public opinion remains important but

isn’t the foundation or the test for legitimate laws in modern democracies.85

To Hirsch86 abolitionists struggle to convince critics that their proposed alternatives are the best

response to violent crimes because the absence of strong penal laws undermines the rationale

for governments by refusing to allocate penalties against wrongdoers equal to the harm

done.Ashworth87 observes that for example restorative justice models replacing retributivism

,as opted for by Justice Langat in a decided case88is second-rate justice because of the power

imbalances caused by inequality in society between the parties being reproduced and reinforced

during mediation. To Cohen89alternative dispute resolution and criminal law are incompatible

because legal boundaries will be blurred resulting in the burden of unnecessary litigation by

converting tortuous liability into crimes.90

According to Choudhry91the need to understand comparative constitutional law is the premise

that law is how the coercive powers of state are described and applied. The role of the courts

therefore is to be the authoritative interpreters of law, particularly in constitutional cases where

judicial review validates and legitimize the exercise of government power. According to

84 Ibid.85Ibid.86 Andrew van Hirsh.(1987) .Past or Future Crimes: Deservedness and Dangerousness in the Sentencing ofCriminals Law and Philosophy.Vol. 6, No. 1 pp. 129-134 http://www.jstor.org/stable/3504683 87Ashworth A.(2002), Responsibilities, rights and restorative justice .The British Journal of Criminology.Vol.

42No. 3 pp. 578-595 http://www.jstor.org/stable/23638882 88 Nairobi High Court Criminal Case No. 86 of 2011eKLR http://kenyalaw.org/caselaw/cases/view/88947/ 89Cohen, S.(1986) Visions of Social Control: Crime, Punishment and Classification. The British Journal of

Sociology.Vol. 37, No. 3 pp. 456-457 http://www.jstor.org/stable/590653 90 Pravin Bowry,SC(Standard Newspapers, Wednesday, June 12th 2013) High Court opens Pandora’s Box on

criminality .,http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2000085732/high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-

oncriminality?articleID=2000085732&story_title=high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality&pageNo=3 91Choudhry,S (1999) Globalization in Search of Justification: Toward a Theory of Comparative

ConstitutionalInterpretation.Ind.LJ,Vol.74No.3,at p.819http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=162

http://www.jstor.org/stable/3504683http://www.jstor.org/stable/3504683http://www.jstor.org/stable/23638882http://www.jstor.org/stable/23638882http://www.jstor.org/stable/23638882http://kenyalaw.org/caselaw/cases/view/88947/http://kenyalaw.org/caselaw/cases/view/88947/http://kenyalaw.org/caselaw/cases/view/88947/http://www.jstor.org/stable/590653http://www.jstor.org/stable/590653http://www.jstor.org/stable/590653http://www.jstor.org/stable/590653http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2000085732/high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality?articleID=2000085732&story_title=high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality&pageNo=3http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2000085732/high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality?articleID=2000085732&story_title=high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality&pageNo=3http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2000085732/high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality?articleID=2000085732&story_title=high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality&pageNo=3http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2000085732/high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality?articleID=2000085732&story_title=high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality&pageNo=3http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1624070http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1624070http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2000085732/high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality?articleID=2000085732&story_title=high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality&pageNo=3http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2000085732/high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality?articleID=2000085732&story_title=high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality&pageNo=3http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2000085732/high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality?articleID=2000085732&story_title=high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality&pageNo=3http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2000085732/high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality?articleID=2000085732&story_title=high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality&pageNo=3http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2000085732/high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality?articleID=2000085732&story_title=high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality&pageNo=3http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2000085732/high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality?articleID=2000085732&story_title=high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality&pageNo=3http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2000085732/high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality?articleID=2000085732&story_title=high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality&pageNo=3http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2000085732/high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality?articleID=2000085732&story_title=high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality&pageNo=3http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2000085732/high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality?articleID=2000085732&story_title=high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality&pageNo=3http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2000085732/high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality?articleID=2000085732&story_title=high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality&pageNo=3http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2000085732/high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality?articleID=2000085732&story_title=high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality&pageNo=3http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2000085732/high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality?articleID=2000085732&story_title=high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality&pageNo=3http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2000085732/high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality?articleID=2000085732&story_title=high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality&pageNo=3http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2000085732/high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality?articleID=2000085732&story_title=high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality&pageNo=3http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2000085732/high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality?articleID=2000085732&story_title=high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality&pageNo=3http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2000085732/high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality?articleID=2000085732&story_title=high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality&pageNo=3http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2000085732/high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality?articleID=2000085732&story_title=high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality&pageNo=3http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2000085732/high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality?articleID=2000085732&story_title=high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality&pageNo=3http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2000085732/high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality?articleID=2000085732&story_title=high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality&pageNo=3http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2000085732/high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality?articleID=2000085732&story_title=high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality&pageNo=3http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2000085732/high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality?articleID=2000085732&story_title=high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality&pageNo=3http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2000085732/high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality?articleID=2000085732&story_title=high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality&pageNo=3http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2000085732/high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality?articleID=2000085732&story_title=high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality&pageNo=3http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2000085732/high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality?articleID=2000085732&story_title=high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality&pageNo=3http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2000085732/high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality?articleID=2000085732&story_title=high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality&pageNo=3http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2000085732/high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality?articleID=2000085732&story_title=high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality&pageNo=3http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2000085732/high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality?articleID=2000085732&story_title=high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality&pageNo=3http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2000085732/high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality?articleID=2000085732&story_title=high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality&pageNo=3http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2000085732/high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality?articleID=2000085732&story_title=high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality&pageNo=3http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2000085732/high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality?articleID=2000085732&story_title=high-court-opens-pandora-s-box-on-criminality&pageNo=3http://www.jstor.org/stable/590653http://www.jstor.org/stable/590653http://www.jstor.org/stable/590653http://kenyalaw.org/caselaw/cases/view/88947/http://kenyalaw.org/caselaw/cases/view/88947/http://www.jstor.org/stable/23638882http://www.jstor.org/stable/3504683


15/17

Professor Surstein, 92courts are under an obligation to engage in a process of public justification

for their own decisions. To Choudhry93 the various features of legal reasoning that must be

publicly justified are more than just the means through which courts arrive at decisions. They

define and constitute the institutional identity of courts. Consequently, the very legitimacy of

judicial institutions hinges on interpretive methodology.94Citing the tendency of American

constitutional theory to exclusively rely on American law, Choudhry suggests that this secures

the legitimacy of judicial decisions. Negatively, it suggests that reliance on foreign sources is

prima facie illegitimate, because foreign law sources are drawn from outside a legal system.95

According to Halmai comparative constitutional law is a product of globalisation that has

exposed superior municipal courts of record in different jurisdictions to ‘constit utional cross

fertilization’.Halmai posits that the main argument for reliance of foreign law sources was

better judicial decisions that pass the public justification test.96Within the emerging global legal

system, there is recognition that the judiciary can be used to abolish the death penalty using

comparative constitutional law. Sitaraman makes an excellent analysis on the controversy of

American superior courts of record using of foreign court decisions in constitutional

interpretation.97

Sitaraman asserts that arguments on municipal courts relying on foreign court decisions can

broadly be categorized to two main branches. The liberal democratic branch of the argument

asserts that unelected judges are the least qualified among the three branches of government to

92 Surstein, C (1993) .The partial Constitution.Havard L.Rev.Chpt2. pgs19-2093 N83.ibid.94 Kathurima M'Inoti (2003). The Impact of English Legal Principles on Constitutional Litigation in Kenya

University of Nairobi Law Journal Voume.1.95 Scalia, J in Roper v. Simmons, (2005) 543 U.S. 551, at622 – 28. http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/u-s-

supremecourt-roper-v-simmons-no-03-633 96Gabor Halmai (2012) the use of Foreign Law in Constitutional interpretation in A.Sajó and M. Rosenfeld

(Eds) Oxford Handbook of Comparative Constitutional Law Oxford Univ.Press.pp, 1328-134697 Sitraman,G(2009)“The Use and Abuse of Foreign Law in Constitutional Interpretation”, Harvard Journal of

Law and Public Policy, vol. 32, pp. 653 – 93

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/u-s-supreme-court-roper-v-simmons-no-03-633http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/u-s-supreme-court-roper-v-simmons-no-03-633http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/u-s-supreme-court-roper-v-simmons-no-03-633http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/u-s-supreme-court-roper-v-simmons-no-03-633http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/u-s-supreme-court-roper-v-simmons-no-03-633http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/u-s-supreme-court-roper-v-simmons-no-03-633http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/u-s-supreme-court-roper-v-simmons-no-03-633http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/u-s-supreme-court-roper-v-simmons-no-03-633http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/u-s-supreme-court-roper-v-simmons-no-03-633http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/u-s-supreme-court-roper-v-simmons-no-03-633http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/u-s-supreme-court-roper-v-simmons-no-03-633http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/u-s-supreme-court-roper-v-simmons-no-03-633http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/u-s-supreme-court-roper-v-simmons-no-03-633http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/u-s-supreme-court-roper-v-simmons-no-03-633http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/u-s-supreme-court-roper-v-simmons-no-03-633http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/u-s-supreme-court-roper-v-simmons-no-03-633http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/u-s-supreme-court-roper-v-simmons-no-03-633http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/u-s-supreme-court-roper-v-simmons-no-03-633http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/u-s-supreme-court-roper-v-simmons-no-03-633http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/u-s-supreme-court-roper-v-simmons-no-03-633http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/u-s-supreme-court-roper-v-simmons-no-03-633http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/u-s-supreme-court-roper-v-simmons-no-03-633http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/u-s-supreme-court-roper-v-simmons-no-03-633http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/u-s-supreme-court-roper-v-simmons-no-03-633http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/u-s-supreme-court-roper-v-simmons-no-03-633


16/17

accurately determine what a nation’s values are. Tushet asserts that democratic constitutions

express a nation’s values98therefore the legitimacy and validity of constitutional law depends

on public opinion.99Choudhry uses the liberal democratic argument to advocate for use of

foreign law materials by asserting there are eternal and universal rights that predate the state

and a Constitution100that are preconditions for democracy that are too fundamental to be left to

the whims of public opinion. In the judicial accuracy strain of the argument, Young asserts that

foreign law decisions can be complex and contextual therefore judges in a forum court would

need a lot of effort to understand a foreign court decisions.101Further, even if the facts before a

forum court could be similar to those decided by a foreign court, different nations have different

Constitutions and therefore different laws in respect to what are basic human rights.

Sitaraman therefore identifies that the arguments against use of foreign court decisions in

American courts as the understandable fear that foreign court decisions will become an excuse

for decisions influenced by non-legal forces and not critical legal reasoning.102Posner and

Sunstein believe that for the sake of judicial accuracy, foreign court decisions touching on

similar facts can be used to elevate the judicial capacity of the forum court by providing

insightful analysis.103Similarly, Dixon contends that a judges can use the proof of many foreign

court decisions reaching their desired conclusion to justify the decision as correct. 104

98 Tushnet,M(1999).The Possibilities of Comparative Constitutional Law, vol 108 Yale L.J.pp1228-29

www.jura.unihamburg.de/public/personen/albers/Seoul_National_University/Tushnet_1999_the_possibilities_of_comperative_constitutional_law.pdf 99 Rosenkrantz,C(2003)Against borrowing and other non-authoritative uses of foreign law .Vol 1INT’L J.Const

pp.269http://icon.oxfordjournals.org/content/1/2/269.full.pdf 100 N83.supra.101 Young, A(2008)Foreign Law and the denominator problem,vol119HARV.L.Rev.at pg165-166102 Tushnet, M (2006) When is knowing less well than knowing more? Unpacking the controversy over supreme

court reference to non US law, vol 90MIN.L.Rev.at pp1275103 Posner,E.A&Sustein,C(2006)The law of other states, vol 59STAN.L.Rev.131 at pg. 169-71104 Dixon, R (2008) A democratic theory of constitutional comparison, vol.56AM..J.Comp.L

at947997http://www.jstor.org/stable/20454651 ;see opinion of Justice Breyer in Printz V.UnitedStates, 521US1997; See Geldon, Carozza & Picker (2014) Comparative Legal Traditions: Text, Materials and

Cases on Western Law, 4th ed.West Academic Publishing.

http://www.jura.unihamburg.de/public/personen/albers/Seoul_National_University/Tushnet_1999_the_possibilities_of_comperative_constitutional_law.pdfhttp://www.jura.unihamburg.de/public/personen/albers/Seoul_National_University/Tushnet_1999_the_possibilities_of_comperative_constitutional_law.pdfhttp://www.jura.unihamburg.de/public/personen/albers/Seoul_National_University/Tushnet_1999_the_possibilities_of_comperative_constitutional_law.pdfhttp://icon.oxfordjournals.org/content/1/2/269.full.pdfhttp://icon.oxfordjournals.org/content/1/2/269.full.pdfhttp://icon.oxfordjournals.org/content/1/2/269.full.pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/20454651http://www.jstor.org/stable/20454651http://www.jstor.org/stable/20454651http://www.jstor.org/stable/20454651http://www.jstor.org/stable/20454651http://icon.oxfordjournals.org/content/1/2/269.full.pdfhttp://icon.oxfordjournals.org/content/1/2/269.full.pdfhttp://www.jura.unihamburg.de/public/personen/albers/Seoul_National_University/Tushnet_1999_the_possibilities_of_comperative_constitutional_law.pdfhttp://www.jura.unihamburg.de/public/personen/albers/Seoul_National_University/Tushnet_1999_the_possibilities_of_comperative_constitutional_law.pdfhttp://www.jura.unihamburg.de/public/personen/albers/Seoul_National_University/Tushnet_1999_the_possibilities_of_comperative_constitutional_law.pdf


17/17

Professor Jackson’s 105deliberative engagement theory argues that if judges have no legal

obligation to consider foreign and international law materials, they can still cite them to justify

their positions in constitutional interpretations or any other issue before them.106However

where municipal law obligates judges to consider international law, like Art.2(5) and 2(6) COK,

it is Professor Jackson’s opinion that foreign or international law materials can be used in a

manner that doesn’t conflict with judicial power as defined by the Constitution of the nation

the court belongs to.

105 Jackson ,V(2010) ‘Constitutional Engagement in a transnational Era’ Oxford Univ.Press.pg 76-78106

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg (30th

July, 2010) “A decent respect to the Opinions of Human kind”: The Value of a Comparative Perspective in Constitutional Adjudication.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/speeches/viewspeech/sp_08-02-10
http://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/speeches/viewspeech/sp_08-02-10http://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/speeches/viewspeech/sp_08-02-10http://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/speeches/viewspeech/sp_08-02-10http://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/speeches/viewspeech/sp_08-02-10http://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/speeches/viewspeech/sp_08-02-10http://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/speeches/viewspeech/sp_08-02-10http://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/speeches/viewspeech/sp_08-02-10http://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/speeches/viewspeech/sp_08-02-10

popular constitutionalism and the future

Documents