http://Money4Refer.com/index.php?refcode=26179

IS KENYAN JUSTICE ONLY WHEN RAILA WINS?

A BUILD-UP OF VOTER APATHY BY RAILA ODINGA SUPPORTERS

The current landmark ruling by the Supreme Court of Kenya upholding the declaration of IEBC of the Uhuru Kenyatta presidency has educed a debate among Raila Odinga’s supporters on whether the verdict was just. Majority of the supporters I interviewed think that the ruling was a breach of justice.

A journalism student in the University of Nairobi, who is also a student representative, updated in his Facebook account that,”Raila Amollo Odinga, forever together. Corded I
was, Corded I am and Corded forever I will be,in Kenya justice goes to the highest bidder.” He went on further to say that impugnity will rule Kenya forever after his colleague said,”On my side i have been CORD Partriotic and will continue in the CORD spirit. Only that i have made a vardict to vote
none unless otherwise.” CORD is the accronym for Coalition Of Reforms and Democracy on whose ticket which the former Kenya Prime Minister, 2013 elections first runners up and the elections petitioner was running on.

In his interview with the BBC on phone, Raila conceded defeat and wished president Uhuru well. He however expressed disatisfaction with the Supreme Court saying it had already created voter apathy for the 2017 general elections.

Raila, just like the petition respondents, was represented by among the best legal minds in his petition. Each of the counsels was paid between 20-100 million shillings for the least and highest paid, respectively. Raila had 20 lawyers on his bar. It was however evident from his submissions and those of the respondents that he was most likely to lose the case. Most of his lawyers did not even attend the court proceedings during the oral evidence submissions of the respondents. They went along with their normal business, perhaps certain about the inclination of the case. After the ruling, the whole country was calm except in Kisumu his home city where there were chaos that saw two people killed and twenty injured with property of his supporters being looted,by his supporters.

The utterances of Raila on voter apathy already have created the apathy among his supporters. A page in Facebook has been created and people who are swearing never to vote again have been joining the page. What they may not be aware of iis that by not voting they will have already voted, for the candidate they did not want. By the time of publishing this story.there are over 23,000 members. The link of the page is
m.facebook.com/iwillnevervoteinakenyanelection?_mn_=11&refid=28&ref=stream&_ft_=qid.5861648006649752259%3Amf_story_key.3212789903056344385

As we remain pondering whether justice is only when Raila wins, president Kenyatta is now left with the big task of uniting Kenyans despite their political orientation and building the confidence of the rival voters again,at least in a five-years time frame.

HUMAN RIGHTS; ARE THEY REALLY RESPECTED BY THE GOVERNMENT?

Abridgement of citizens’ right to change their government in the last national election; unlawful killings, torture, rape, and use of excessive force by security forces; mob violence; police corruption and impunity; harsh and life-threatening prison conditions; arbitrary arrest and detention; arbitrary interference with the home and infringement on citizens’ privacy; prolonged pretrial detention; executive influence on the judiciary and judicial corruption; restrictions on freedom of speech, press, and assembly; forced return and abuse of refugees, including killing and rape; official corruption; violence and discrimination against women; violence against children, including female genital mutilation (FGM); child prostitution; trafficking in persons; interethnic violence; discrimination based on ethnicity, sexual orientation, and HIV/AIDS status; lack of enforcement of workers’ rights; forced and bonded labor; and child labor, including forced child labor.

The report outlines the following:

RESPECT FOR HUMAN RIGHTS

 Section 1 Respect for the Integrity of the Person, Including Freedom From:

a. Arbitrary or Unlawful Deprivation of Life

There were several reports that the government or its agents committed arbitrary and unlawful killings, included politically motivated killings, during the year. The government took only limited action in enforcing the law against security forces suspected of unlawfully killing citizens.  

On March 11, seven administration police executed seven taxi drivers in the Kawangware slums west of Nairobi. The seven men were arrested, appeared in court on March 31, and were charged on December 11. A trial had not begun by year’s end.

In July, according to Amnesty International, a 74-year-old unarmed man was shot and killed by police after verbally protesting the beating of a woman during a forced evacuation of a Nairobi settlement. There were no developments in the case by year’s end.

In September administration police killed 14 persons and dumped their bodies in Kinale Forest. Police made no statement about the killings although there were reports that three of the victims were known criminals. Members of Parliament (MP) tasked the Minister of Security with issuing a report on the murders although no report had been produced by year’s end.

On November 6, a police officer shot and killed 10 persons, including two fellow officers, while allegedly looking for a woman who infected him with HIV. There were no developments in this case by year’s end.

In February 2009 Philip Alston, the UN special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary, or arbitrary executions, released a report that found ‘that police in Kenya frequently execute individuals and that a climate of impunity prevails. The rapporteur also reported. The existence of poke death squads operating on the orders of senior police officials and charged with eliminating suspected leaders and members of criminal organizations. The government rejected the findings of the Alston report and filed a protest with the UN. According to media reports, however, the Ministry of Internal Security acknowledged in a February 2009 letter to the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights (KNCHR) that police had killed 308 youths in 2008.

In 2008 the government formed the Commission of Inquiry into Postelection Violence (CIPEV) as part of the internationally mediated political settlement. The CIPEV documented 405 gunshot deaths during the postelection period; it attributed the vast majority of these to police. The final CIPEV report recommended that the government establish a special tribunal to investigate individuals suspected of such violence; however, no local tribunal was established, and the government still had not systematically investigated or prosecuted individuals suspected of postelection violence through other means by year’s end. However, on December 15, the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) announced that he had asked a pretrial chamber to issue summonses for six Kenyan nationals on charges of crimes against humanity for their alleged role in the 2007-08 postelection violence.

In March 2009 unidentified gunmen, reportedly acting on orders from the former commissioner of police, shot and/killed Oscar Kamau King’ara, the executive director of the local nongovernmental organization (NGO) Oscar Foundation Free Legal Aid Clinic Kenya (OFFLACK), and Paul Oulu, OFFLACK’s program coordinator. In 2008 OFFLACK reported that police were linked with the continued disappearance and deaths of suspected members of the banned Mungiki criminal organization. Police threatened and intimidated witnesses to the killings, and four witnesses went into exile. The prime minister requested international assistance to investigate the murders, but the minister for foreign affairs subsequently rejected such assistance. No credible investigation had been conducted by year’s end, and none was expected.

Security forces continued to claim that police must shoot to kill to defend themselves when confronted by armed suspects, for example. in September 2009, the media reported that the district commissioner for Murang’a  East District issued  “shoot to kill” order   against suspected Mungiki members, and in October 2009 a district commissioner  in marakwet announced a “shoot to kill” policy against suspected armed bandits. The policy first was enunciated in 2005 and later reiterated in 2007, after armed criminals killed 43 police officers in the line of duty.

On March 10, police reportedly killed seven suspected members of the Mungiki in a police operation in Nairobi. Police claimed that a gun battle had started after police shot at a mob that was attacking motorcyclists to extort motorcycle taxi drivers.

During the year there were reports that persons died while in police custody or shortly thereafter,

some as a result of torture. For example, the Daily Nation reported in January that a 24-year-old man was tortured to death while undergoing police interrogation regarding a livestock theft at the Ngomeni Police Station. No further information was available at year’s end.

In November the Standard newspaper reported that a man, arrested at a bar for an altercation with a police officer, was dragged to a police station by the officer and chained and beaten to death. No further information was available at year’s end.

 b. Disappearance

Unlike in the previous year, there were no reports of disappearances or politically motivated abductions. There were no developments in the January 2009 case in which a journalist was abducted and killed. There were no developments in the September 2009 case in which the Muslim Human Rights Forum alleged that five Muslims suspected by the government of involvement in terrorist activity were abducted by the Antiterrorism Police Unit (ATPU) and subsequently disappeared. The ATPU denied the allegations.

The KNCHR, the IMLU and Western Kenya Human Rights Watch (WKHRW) reported that the government failed to investigate disappearances in connection with the 2008 security force operation in Mount Elgon and the crackdown on the Mungiki criminal organization in 2008.

Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

The constitution and law prohibit such practices; however, the legal code does not define torture and provides no sentencing guidelines, which functionally bars prosecution for torture. Police frequently used violence and torture during interrogations and as punishment of pretrial detainees and convicted prisoners. According to the IMLU, physical battery was the most common method of torture used by the police.

Human rights organizations, churches, and the press reported numerous cases of torture and indiscriminate police beatings.

In 2008 the IMLU receive 772 cases alleging torture by security officers, compared with 397 in 2005, although it noted that the number of torture cases was likely higher.

There were allegations of rape by security forces, including the rape of women in prisons, as well as in camps for internally displaced persons (IDPs) and refugees and among asylum seekers crossing into the country from Somalia.

For example, in March Human Rights Watch (HRW) conducted 102 interviews regarding sexual violence in the Dadaab refugee camps. In 46 of the cases, police were accused of gang-raping women in the camps or on their way to the camps. The Center for Rights Education Awareness alleged in 2008 that policemen raped women in the Kibera slum in Nairobi and those seeking refuge in police stations.

Police use of excessive force to disperse demonstrators resulted in injuries (see section 2b.). Due to a shortage of civilian state prosecutors in the legal system (72 civilian prosecutors nationwide compared to 315 police prosecutors), police were responsible for investigating and prosecuting all crimes at the magistrate court level; civilian prosecutors handled cases at the high court level. Police routinely ignored evidence of security force torture provided by the IMLU and other human rights organizations. In most cases allegations of torture were not fully investigated and the perpetrators not charged.

As part of reforms agreed to in the National Accord in July 2009 the government established the Truth, Justice, and Reconciliation Commission (TJRC), whose mandate included the investigation of alleged cases of torture since independence. The TJRC had collected statements but had not conducted any hearings by year’s end.

The government did not investigate alleged cases of torture by security forces that were documented by the IMLU and HRW from the Mount Elgon and El Wake security operations in2008. The government denied that security forces engaged in torture and refused to prosecute individuals alleged to have participated in torture during the two operations.
From the context of human rights in Kenya and their foundations in the Kenyan constitution and the UN UDHR, one would conclude that the leadership and the citizens would exercise full commitment and uphold the said-rights and freedoms. This is because; these are the preconditions for a dignified life between the state and the individual, and among individuals. However, this has not always been the case, as discussed above.

THE MARRIAGE BETWEEN UNITED NATIONS UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS (UNUDHR) AND THE CURRENT CONSTITUTION OF KENYA

The UDHR was adopted and proclaimed by General Assembly resolution 217A (III) of  10 December 1948. On December 10, 1948 the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted and proclaimed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights the full text of which appears in the following pages. Following this historic act the Assembly called upon all member countries publicize the text of the Declaration and to cause it to be disseminated, displayed, read and expounded principally in schools and other educational institutions, without distinction based on the political status of countries or territories.

The Universal Declaration, it must be noted, is not a treaty. It was meant to proclaim a common standard of achievement for all Peoples and all nations rather than enforceable legal obligations. Nevertheless, partly because of an 18- year delay between its adoption and the completion for signature and ratification of the two Covenants, the Universal Declaration has acquired a status jurisdiction more important than originally intended. It has been widely used, even by national Courts, as a means of judging compliance with human rights obligations under the UN Charter.

Article 1 of the declaration states:

All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

 

THE CONSTITUTIONAL FOUNDATIONS 

Kenya had been using the same constitution that was left by the colonialists since independence in 1963 until a new one was adopted on 27th August 2010 during the promulgation. However, though
the two constitutions may seem to differ, most of the content in the old one is still contained in the new one.

On May 4 2010, citizens approved a new constitution in a national referendum, widely considered to be free and fair. Some of its elements entered into force immediately, but full implementation was expected to take several years. It was expected that if fully implemented, it would result in significant changes to the government’s structure, including greater checks on executive power, the elimination of a prime minister, greater devolution of power to the counties, and creation of a second legislative chamber. There were instances in which elements of the security forces acted independently of civilian control.

The constitution and the UN UDHR have been violated over the years by successive Kenyan regimes. Examples are shown below:

Chapter four of the constitution of Kenya is about the rights and fundamental freedoms of its citizens. Part one of the chapter regards the general provisions relating to the bill of rights. Article 25 states:

Despite any other provision in this Constitution, the following rights and fundamental freedoms

shall not be limited—

(a)   Freedom from torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment;

 

During the first post-independence presidency of Kenya, under President Jomo Kenyatta, state security forces harassed dissidents and were suspected of complicity. Since 2002, under the Mwai Kibaki presidency, politically motivated human rights violations have diminished, but other serious human rights abuses persist, a great many at the hands of security forces, particularly the police. The police force is widely viewed as the most corrupt entity in the country, given to extorting bribes, complicity in criminal activity, and using excessive force against both criminal suspects and crowds. Most police who commit abuses still do so with impunity. Prison conditions remain life threatening.

(b) Freedom from slavery or servitude;

(c) The right to a fair trial; and

(d) The right to an order of  habeas corpus  (latin:) We command that you have the body’, It is a legal action through which a prisoner can be released from unlawful detention, that is, detention Lacking sufficient cause or evidence.

In several murders of prominent personalities deemed as threats to his regime, including Pio Gama Pinto, Tom Mboya and J.M. Kariuki. MP and Lawyer C.M.G. Argwings-Kodhek and former KADU leader and Minister Ronald Ngala also died, in suspicious car accidents.

 

Article 26 of the constitution states that:

(1) Every person has the right to life.

In several murders of pro1minent personalities deemed as threats to his regime, including Pio Gama Pinto, Tom Mboya and J.M. Kariuki. MP and Lawyer C.M.G. Argwings-Kodhek and former Kadu Leader and Minister Ronald Ngala also died, in suspicious car accidents. On 5 March 2009, two of the human rights investigators involved in the investigations documented in the report, Oscar Kamau King’ara and John Paul Oulu, were assassinated. Their assassinations were attributed by non-governmental organizations to the security forces.

On 3 June 2007, two days after President Mwai Kibaki stated that Mungiki members “should expect no mercy”, about 300 Mungiki members were arrested and at least 20 killed. John Michuki, at the time Minister for Internal Security, publicly stated following the killings, “We will pulverize and finish them off. Even those arrested over the recent killings, I cannot tell you where they are today. What you will certainly hear is that so and so’s burial is tomorrow”.

(2) The life of a person begins at conception.

(3) A person shall not be deprived of life intentionally, except to the extent authorized by this

      Constitution or other written law.

In the KNCHR’s Cry of Blood — Report on Extra-Judi ‘ I Killings and Disappearances published in September 2008, the KNCHR reported these in  their key finding stating that the forced

disappearances and extrajudicial killings appeared to be official policy_ In November 2008, Wikileaks brought wide international attention to the cry of blood . In the report, the KNCHR’s first key finding was that, the evidence gathered by the KNCHR establishes patterns of conduct by the Kenya Police that may constitute crimes against humanity.

(4) Abortion is not permitted unless, in the opinion of a trained health professional, there is need for emergency treatment, or the life or health of the mother is in danger, or if permitted by any other written law.

Every year, about 380,000 Kenyan women die of abortion-related complications. This occurs due to unprofessional, quirk doctors in backstreet locations, and the reliance of untrained midwives to handle the procedure.

Article 27 of the constitution states:

(1) Every person is equal before the law and has the right to equal protection and equal benefit of the law.

(2) Equality includes the full and equal enjoyment of all rights and fundamental freedoms.

(3) Women and men have the right to equal treatment, including the right to equal opportunities in political, economic, cultural and social spheres.

Violence and discrimination against women are rife. The abuse of children, including in forced labor and prostitution, is a serious problem. Female genital mutilation (FGM) remains widespread, despite 2001 legislation against it for girls under 16. The abuse of women and girls, including early marriage and wife inheritance, is a factor in the spread of human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immune deficiency syndrome (HIV/AIDS).

Article 28 of the constitution states:

  Every person has inherent dignity and the right to have th dignity respected and protected.

Between 1989 and 1991, Kenya saw one of the worst human rights violations in its history. Moi accused advocates of multiparty politics of subversion, and thereby got a fresh excuse for detaining a new generation of his critics. A number of the champions of multiparty politics–John Khaminwa, Raila Odinga, Mohammed Ibrahim, Gitobu Imanyara, Kenneth Matiba and Charles Rubia–among others, were detained under inhuman conditions and without trial.

Apart from police and penal system abuses, infringernents of rights in the course of’ legal proceedings are widespread, despite recent pressure on judicial personnel. Freedoms of speech and of the press continue to be compromised through various forms of harassment of journalists and activists.

 29 Every person has the right to freedom and security of the person, which includes the right not to be—

(a) deprived of freedom arbitrarily or without just cause;

 (b) detained without trial, except during a state of emergency, in which case the detention is subject to Article 58;

 Detentions and political trials, torture, arbitrary arrests and police brutality reminiscent of the colonial era had become common during Moi’s tenure. He perceived human rights generally as alien and Euro centric conceptions inconsistent with African values and culture. He viewed the pro-democracy and human rights advocates in Kenya as unpatriotic, disloyal, and ungrateful individuals influenced by what he calls foreign masters.

(c) Subjected to any form of violence from either public or private sources;

(d) subjected to torture in any manner, whether physical or psychological;

The emergence of the little known clandestine London based movement, Mwakenya, set the stage for more widespread human rights violations by his Administration. In 1986 alone, 100 people were arrested and detained for their alleged association with Mwakenya, the movement started by some Kenyans in Europe who had fled Moi’s oppression, demanded, inter alia, social justice and respect for human rights. Even though Moi made a big issue out of the movement, there was no tangible evidence of a well organized group in the country that threatened Kenya’s national security and which would have warranted the massive arbitrary arrest, torture, and detention without trial of the suspects.

Under former president Daniel Moi, security forces regularly subjected opposition leaders and pro-democracy activists to arbitrary arrest, detention without trial, abuse in custody, and deadly force.

38. (1) Every citizen is free to make political choices, which includes the right—

(a) to form, or participate in forming, a political party;

(b) to participate in the activities of, or recruit members for, a political party; or

(c) to campaign for a political party or  cause

A few years after taking over the presidency, Moi began  to exercise his style of authoritarianism by detaining  a number of Kenyans critical of his government. The extent to which detention had been consistently used as an  instrument for suppressing  Moi’s out spoken opponents in the 1980s and 1990s was enormous. Some of these detainees were former or sitting MPs arrested for demanding, among other things, the introduction of multiparty politics.

After the university staff union was banned, University of Nairobi faculty members, Willy Mutunga and Katana Mukangi, were detained for what Moi called “over-indulgence in politics”. This was just the beginning of the crackdown on Kenyans by his administration in the 1980s, Apart from detaining the UASU leaders, the passports of lecturers considered to be critical of his rule were seized.

Kenya made some progress in 2003, when it set up a national human rights institution, the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights (KNCHR), with a mandate to ensuring Kenya’s compliance with international human rights standards. Also, parliament passed the Children’s Act to ensure the protection of minors, as well as the Disability Act, outlawing discrimination against the disabled.

A KOREAN MAN MEETS A KIKUYU

THEIR INTERESTING CONVERSATION OF HOW LANGUAGE BEGETS CULTURE.

The players of both teams matched into pitch thrasonically, probably because of their smart uniforms, each of them seeming to be convivial. For a few minutes, everything went taciturn in respect for the football anthem, but soon the whole stadium was as noisy as a menagerie .The players amicably greeted their rivals, then took their seats and made an orison before taking their positions waiting for the referee’s whistle to start the game. In no time, one team would be full of hauteur, while the other would fly back to their domiciles in melancholy without any reward, but predicting the winning team at this time was an enigma. The teams were both well prepared and confident of winning the deer trophy that they had both contributed to it purchase. It was the match between Kenya and Korea.

The match kicked off, all the players in gusto. There was pandemonium in the whole stadium. Kinyanjui from Kenya sat next to Jit Folm Park.

“Eotteohge jinae?” Jit said.

“Habari yako?”Kinyanjui rather asked having not heard what Jit said.

“Nan dangsin-ui eon-eoleul ihaehal su,”Jit responded.

“Siielewi lugha yako,”Kinyanjui said after confirming that he could not comprehend the language at all.“Nan yeong-eo malhal su,”Jit said,“yeong-eo hal jul su issseubnikka?”“Naweza zungumza Kiingereza.Can you speak English?”Kinyanjui involved his less-practicd English.

What the two new friends did not know was that they were saying the same thing but in different languages. Upon realizing this they were filled with felicity. Meanwhile,rain started falling. First it titillated in light showers that washed the sudation of the players away but later became noxious when it could not allow the match to continue.“Hey,you did not tell me your name. I am Jit Folm Park from Korea,and you?”Jit asked.“Park?I have heard of Park,might you be related?I know him,”Kinyanjui said.“Yes,he is my cousin. I am sure you are talking of Ji Sung Park,the one in the pitch,”Jit replied.“Oh,good news. I am Kinyanjui. Kinyanjui Kimanjuru,and in case of confusion you can just call me KK,”Kinyanjui who did not want to say he loved his nick name more said.“Oh!Kenyan Chui. I have seen a Kenyan Chui when I toured the game reserve. Are you named after it?”Jit asked. The rain had now become too heavy to allow any more talking. They had to go to their hotels and wait until when the match would be repeated.

Surprisingly,they met in the hotel. They had booked the same place. “The match has been postponed to tomorrow in the evening,hoping it will not be raining. That  is a good time because I will have attended all my classes. Then  I will fly back. I hope there are afternoon flights from Kenya to Pretoria,if not I will have to do on-line classes,”Jit started the new conversation.

“Sure. Where do you study?”KK asked.

“I teach. I teach in Manahaim college in Nairobi Kenya.”

“I have heard about that college.”

“Why don’t you join then?Am sure it is as much fun learning Korean as it is in teaching.”

Kinyanjui had heard about the college and had contemplated to join it. After registering, before commencing his classes, he became among the fortunate ones to win a ticket to watch the match between Kenya and Korea in South Africa. He was very determined to learn the language because other than aspiring to be multi-lingual, he very much wanted to know about the culture of the Koreans that he had always fancied watching in movies. As the chatted along, he realized that Jit was a pedagogue in the same institution. He was certain that in making friends with Jit, he was increasing his chances of learning more.   He was also happy that in case they lacked anything to talk about, they would talk about the college. He ordered for two glasses of mango juice as they sat at one of the clean tables.

“I am happy Korean studies have been introduced in Kenya.”

“I am happy Korean studies have been introduced in Kenya, ”KK repeated his statement after coughing a feigned cough and getting no answer. He wanted to know how much really knowing the language would help him in knowing the culture of the Koreans. Jit had actually heard the statement but was hesitant to answer because it would hijack his train of thoughts that he had just got his mind into. He was cogitating: how the knowledge of the Korean language in Kenya would facilitate international relations between the two countries; how so many aspects of life between the two countries would be shared and how living life would become an easy task. He knew that that would completely change the relationship between the two countries from what has been over the last few decades into a new dawn. “Oh, yes, I am sorry, I am happy as well,” he answered.

KK told Jit of his great desire in knowing the Korean culture and Jit was even willing to talk more about it. He told KK how the Korean language is used to maintain and convey the culture of the Koreans and how the implications of language are completely entwined in culture. He said that teaching a foreign language is also to teaching the paradigm of a foreign culture. He explained that as teachers they instruct their students on the cultural background of the language usage, choose culturally appropriate teaching styles and explore culturally based linguistic differences to promote understanding instead of misconceptions or prejudice. Therefore,in only attending the class,one had already started learning the culture of the Koreans and their way of living.

“You should always compare and contrast the cultural differences in language usage especially the grammatical and idiom usage in their cultural contexts between your culture and ours,”Jit said as he sipped his blended-mango juice.“I do not really see the importance of this,”KK said as he sipped his too. He was keeping pace with Jit’s the drinking of the juice. He did not want to finish earlier or later than Jit. Within himself he knew he was also learning culture in this way.“Visualizing and understanding the differences will enable you to correctly judge the appropriate uses and causation of language idiosyncrasies. You will fully understand why certain things in Korea are said,their background as well as their application in our culture,”Jit continued further. KK was attentively listening and nodding his head in approval.“For example,you have noticed that our greetings follow strict rules,one shakes hands after the common bow. Is this not different from you culture? You learn the greeting etiquette in the Korean language class and you are later to apply this practically. If you understand a difference like this one,you will fully understand the background as well as its application in our culture-a person of a lower status bows to the person of higher status but it is the senior person who initiates the handshake. The person who initiates the bow says…” “Man-na-suh pan-gop-sumnida,”KK cut in.

“Which means?”Jit asked.

KK started laughing. With this Jit knew he did not what that meant and started laughing too,not with KK but at KK.KK was a person who loved humor. He stopped laughing all of a sudden and said,“pleased to meet you,”then stated laughing again. He was right.

“Let me recapitulate all these. I have learned the greeting etiquette in your language. I have hereby known how you Koreans go about the communicational protocol when you meet. The conclusion is that I have known something about your culture regarding communication,am I right?”KK asked.

“Very!You are a good student. You can as well become a language pedagogue!”Jit said as he laughed and sipped all the remaining juice. KK did not want to look as if he was doing like Jit was doing.“That is what I am aiming at,”he said as he laughed and sipped all his juice as well,he had forgotten and done it,“if I had a mustache like yours I would teach.”Both of them laughed hysterically.“You are very hilarious,”Jit commented.“That is my talent ,”KK bragged. “Really?It must be. You see,when you have realized your talent,and you are learning the Korean language,it is true that you will put more effort in learning the language that is mostly applied in your field of interest. What am I saying,you,for example will be interested in knowing more about the language that the comedians in Korea mostly use. In this way,you will end up knowing about the cultural behavior of them. Another person will be interested in the artists,politicians,or even the business people’s language. Eventually different aspects of culture will be comprehended. Has the introduction of the Korean language in Kenya not taught the Kenyans the Korean culture?”

“It really has because all these things that you are telling me would not have been known. That is true,”Jit answered.“That was meant to be a rhetorical question,it needed no answer,”Jit said and they both started laughing. “You never told me you were a comedian,”KK complained. “I never told you I am not a comedian too,” Jit defended himself,but actually,he was not.

“Jit,but you know almost every kind of practical activity has today created a school of its own , and  created a group of specialized intellectuals of a higher level to teach in these schools. Thus, alongside the older, traditional type of schooling where everything taught was alike,don’t you think that the differences in schooling will portray aspects of culture that differ?”KK asked after thinking hard to formulate this question. He had now put his English language into full use.

“I agree. Today has seen a widespread educational crisis and this can be precisely linked to the fact that the process of differentiation and specialization in education has taken place chaotically, without clear and precise principles, without a well thought out and consciously fixed plan which has not only resulted to different modes of information delivery but actually totally different delivered information,”Jit agreed, “however the background of the teaching still remains the same,based on the same culture of the people teaching. What they learned was based on a certain culture,and fundamentally that shall pass into them and that is what they will deliver. This case in the reality does not fully apply to Korea because as you know our country is homogeneous  and in spite of having gotten different education paradigms,those who teach the  language are still from the same culture and as much as you are learning this language,the culture will be transmitted to you. In fact the mode of teaching is something to learn from. We do not teach in the same way that Kenyans teach hence this will also teach you something about our culture if you are learning our language,our way of teaching and our way of learning as from our culture is what will really be portrayed in this,”Jit continued explaining further. He had set an objective of explaining to KK how the introduction of the Korean language in Kenya was promoting the understanding of the culture of Koreans. So far he had partly achieved his objective. 

“It seems that I am not the only one interested in knowing your culture,you also want me to,”KK said.

“We are promoting the knowledge of the language very much. That is why we are even offering the  learning of the language at a price close to free at our institution. For those who perform excellently we are offering scholarships to them to go and learn more about our culture in Korea,practically. When they are equipped with the knowledge of the language they can become ethnographers in Korea. Is that not a good idea?”Jit asked.

“That is a rhetorical question,”KK replied. They both laughed to the joke,this time laughing with each other.

Dusk had already now started creeping in. It was the waiter who came to them and said,“I am sorry to interrupt you sirs,I guess you are discussing business. You have been sitting here the whole afternoon and have only taken juice,would you mind having anything else?” “Oh it is already dark. No thank you. I need to take bath first then watch world news before eating. Perhaps my friend here will not mind,”Jit said. “No thank you. I am also doing the same,”KK said as they both stood up to leave for their rooms. One thing was now clear in his mind,and he was more determined to implement it after watching the match and going back to Kenya,that his learning of the language of the Koreans would give him a clear understanding of their way of life and he would exemplary hard in this. It was now evident to him that language begets culture.

MINORITIES TOO HAVE RIGHTS

A right is an inherent civil liberation that accrues to a person for the mere fact of being a human being. They are inalienable and apply equally in a universalistic manner to all. Freedoms on the other hand are the preconditions for a dignified existence where people live independently without the state violating on the freedoms. They establish rules of relations between the state and the individual and among individuals.

Minority groups are sub-groups within a culture which are distinguishable from the dominant group in power by reason of differences in physical features, language, customs, as cultural patterns (including any one or combination of these factors). Such sub-groups are regarded (or regard themselves) as inherently different from the dominant power group; for this reason they withdraw from full participation in the life of the culture.

They refer to a group of people who appear to be inconsequential to most people for distinguishing themselves from the other people. The minority group may be ethnic, religious, linguistic and indigenous peoples. They include statistical or numerical size, power distribution (social or political), homogeneous physical or cultural traits, and differential treatment or status.

SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT

There is a wide consensus among sociologists that the term should not be regarded as a statistical concept. However there exists different schools of thoughts who try to define minorities.

v  The classical definition is that of L. Wirth who said, “We may define a minority as a group of people who, because of their physical or cultural characteristics, are singled out from the others in the society in which they live for differential and unequal treatment, and who therefore regard themselves as objects of collective discrimination. Minority status carries with it the exclusion from full participation in the life of the society.”

v  While Wirth placed the minority group in opposition to the majority group, A.M and C.B Rose, rejecting any purely numerical definition, give special emphasis to this opposition in their definition: “The mere fact of being generally hated and being hated because of religious, racial or national background is what defines a minority group.”

v  Unlike Wirth and Rose, R.A Schermeshorn gives a definition of minority group which does not require a conscious application of differential treatment of the minority group on the part of the dominant or minority group. Schermerhorn says, “Minorities are subgroups within a culture which are distinguished from the dominant by reason of differences in physiognomy, language, customs or cultural patterns(including any combination of these factors. Such sub-groups are regarded as inherently different and “Not belonging” to the dominant group; for this reason they are consciously or unconsciously excluded from full participation in the life of the culture.”

TYPES OF MINOTITIES

A minority is not necessarily a numerical minority, it may include any group that is subnormal with respect to a dominant group in terms of social status, education, employment, wealth and political power. Other minority groups include people with disabilities, “economic minorities”  that is, the working poor or unemployed, “age minorities” those who are younger or older than a typical working age and sexual minorities.

Examples of minority groups in Kenya are the Maasais, Ogieks, Sangwer, Ilchamus, Endrois and the El Molo.

Minorities are of two types, ethnic and racial.

  1.  ETHNIC MINORITIES

An ethnic minority is a group which differs in some cultural respect from the dominant group. Some authorities use the term “nationality” in preference to “ethnic group.”

Examples are: The Irish of Boston, the Norwegians of Brooklyn, and the Greeks of New Haven

This is because the aforementioned are not distinguishable biologically from the minority of the population of those cities; but in so far as they are set apart it is by their language, religion, habits, or traditions.

Since religion is one phase of a people’s culture, groups of this type may be classified with ethnic minorities. Thus Hindus are a minority in Pakistan, Muslims in India, Protestants in Italy, and Roman Catholics in the United States. The Amish, a sect devoted to farming as a way of life and to the utmost simplicity in material goods, migrated from Europe to the United States generations ago.

Religious groups are frequently the objects of differential and discriminatory treatment. The Christians were a minority in ancient Rome. Baptists were expelled from colonial Massachusetts, Mormons had to free to Utah, and Quakers and Huguenots (French Protestants) have often found themselves playing the role of scapegoats.

  1.  RACIAL MINORITIES

The group is distinguishable only by its hereditary, physical characteristics, and these form the basis for such cohesion as the group possesses. Among the racial minorities are the Cape Colored of South Africa and the Anglo-Indians of India.

Certain groups however, such as the American Indians and the Japanese-Americans, have the characteristic of both racial and ethnic groups.

Many other groups in a society present problems similar to those of racial and ethnic groups. Women, the aged, intellectuals, teen-agers, and conscientious objectors are often the victims of differential treatment, are excluded from full social participation, and sometimes manifest the resentments and grievances common to minorities. Students of intergroup relations, however, usually exclude such groups from their discussions, and limit themselves to racial and ethnic groups.

THE ORIGINS OF MINORITIES

a)      Political changes

Minorities are sometimes acquired by a nation in the process of its growth and expansion, or by the shifting of political boundaries.

In 1848, following the Mexican War, the United States annexed vast territories in the south west, along with the thousands of Spanish colonials who lived there, the offspring of the conquistadors and Mexican Indians who had settled that frontiers in the 16th century. Their descendants today, known as Spanish–Americans, or Hispanics, constitute the about half of the population of New Mexico and significant minorities in neighboring states, and are distinctly an underprivileged group.

This process of acquiring minority groups has been more characteristic of European nations than of the United States. Many of the racial and ethnic minorities of the U.S.S.R are a consequence of three centuries of conquest and expansion on the past of the [ex-] Russian Empire. The Hapsburg Empire, with its numerous minorities, was largely built by dynastic marriages and succession rights.

b)     Initial causes

Minority problems are treated as though they were a phenomenon only of modern times, having their origin in the rise of capitalism or in the expansion of Europe. No doubt they did reach a new magnitude when, in the 15th century, the people of Europe began to overflow their boundaries and set out to explore, convert, conquer, and colonize every corner of the earth.

Nevertheless, there are reasons for believing that pre-historic, preliterate peoples roamed widely over the earth and came into contact and conflict with strangers who differed from themselves both racially culturally. From archeology, folklore, linguistics, human biology, and cultural anthropology comes abundant evidence to prove that from earliest times there have been wars and invasions, groups conquered and dominated others, there was cultural interchange, biological interbreeding, prejudice, differential treatment, and all the other phenomena which today we associate with inter-group relations.

c)      Population movements

The cause of inter-group relations varies and the direction it takes depends to no small degree upon whether the new comers role is that of the conqueror, colonizer, refugee, immigrant, or slave.

The various types of population movements which give rise to problems of minority-majority relations may be classified as follows:

                                                                                                        i.            Invasion

This term often includes any hostile or war-like encroachment upon the domain of another, but we restrict it to those cases where a simple but virile people leave its home and overrun the territory of a more highly developed society. It is a mass movement, involving a large portion if not the whole, of the tribe. A particular destination is lacking, and there is certain irrationality in the process.

Examples of invasions which produced problems of minority-majority group relations would include the Gothic migration from Asia into the Roman Empire, the Aztec invasion of Mexico, the movement of the Hun and Magyar into Europe and that the Mongol into China.

                                                                                                      ii.            Conquest

This involves the expansion of a highly developed society over a simpler people. It occurs when a well- developed state sends out its armies into the territory of less advanced peoples, and imposes its political system upon them. The movement of people into the conquered territory may be insignificant, and in this respect movement resulting from conquest differs from other types of population movements; but the effects of conquest upon the subjected peoples may be profound and lasting.

                                                                                                    iii.            Colonization

This type of movement occurs when a well-developed society sends out bodies of its citizens to settle in certain specified localities. Such a transplanted fragment remains closely tied to its mother country politically, economically, and culturally. A distinction is made between the farm type and the plantation type. The former arises when climatic conditions are similar to those of the mother country, rendering acclimatization easy, and permitting the migration of whole families, and ultimately resulting in the colonists transferring their primary allegiance from their old home to the new one. Frequently, labour has to be imported. Many crucial race problems have arisen under such conditions.

                                                                                                     iv.            Immigration

This type of population movement involves the entrance into an alien country of persons intending to take post in the life of that country and to make it their permanent residence. It is largely a phenomenon of the 19th and 20th centuries. It is a peaceful movement, between countries which are on friendly terms, or at least not hostile, one of which is old and densely populated while the other is new and less thickly populated. Unlike those movements described above, it is primarily an individual undertaking rather than the organized movement of an integrated group, although governments do control, regulate, direct, and encourage or discourage the process.

                                                                                                       v.            Forced migration

This occurs when groups of people are compelled against their will to leave their native land and go elsewhere, either with or without a specific destination.

The Moors were expelled from Spain in 1609, and other Jews have been forced to leave one country after another throughout their history. Huguenots were driven from France in the 17th century; Gypsies were expelled from England by Henry VIII; and the Acadians, heroes of Longfellow’s Evangeline, were uprooted and scattered throughout the English colonies of North America. The Negro’s presence in the New World is a result of forced migration, and his relations with other races which he encountered have always been affected by the circumstances under which the contacts occurred. For centuries the relationship was one of master and slave, consequences of which are still felt, long after the institution has been abolished. The 20th century has witnessed the forced migration of millions of people, displaced persons, and refugees, who reluctantly left their homes, or were expelled because of their race, nationality, or political opinions.

                                                                                                     vi.            Internal migration

Minority problems are profoundly affected by migrations which occur within the boundaries of a political entity. There have been times, of course, when there was very little movement of people within the borders of a state.

Under serfdom, for instance, one did not have the right to move; and even with the disappearance of serfdom, the individual was still not endowed with independence of action, for he was a member of a community which regulated many aspects of his life. Nowadays, however, internal migrations are going on continually in all civilized countries. Such migrations have been conscious features of American society, profoundly affecting its history, institutions, and culture, and especially the relations between racial and ethnic groups. There were the migrations of the Indians, both before and after the arrival of the Europeans. Then there was the westward march of the American people, which played no small part in the assimilation of the diverse ethnic groups which had come to these shores. More recently, we have witnessed the drift of population from country to city, significant interstate migrations, seasonal migrations of labour, and most significant for minority group relations, the great migration of Negroes from the rural south to the industrial cities of the North.

MINORITY–MAJORITY CONFLICT

The minority problem is basically a struggle for power and status, social and economic. The group which enjoys the greater prestige and wields the power is always jealous of its privileges, will not surrender them without a struggle, and is determined to defend its own values and its culture against competing and conflicting systems. The subordinate group is invariably “all right in its place”. The lesser group, at the same time, is no less attached to its traditions and values, and is not satisfied for long with its inferior position, and it is eager to improve its status. It is only when the subordinate group seeks to rise that its presence is resented. To the dominant group the problem is essentially one of maintaining its position of dominance and of preserving its privileged way of life. A docile, subservient, industrious racial or ethnic minority can be most useful, and even indispensable, but such a minority becomes a menace when it grows restless, clamors for change, and aspires to play new roles. Form the stand point the underprivileged minority, on the other hand, the problem is one of achieving a more desirable status, of removing the stigma of inferiority, of obtaining more power, of casing off the disabilities and handicaps imposed upon it.

FORMS OF CONFLICT

Conflict between dominant and minority groups assumes a variety of forms, and these vary from place to place and from time to time. They include:

  • Insurrections
  • Programs
  • Rebellions
  • Riots
  • Relatively peaceful techniques as picketing and boycotting.

SOLUTIONS TO MINORITY-MAJORITY CONFLICT

v  ANNIHILATION

Annihilation of the menacing minority means the total destruction or eradication of the minority groups. However it needs not be deliberate and malicious. Even where extermination has not been a conscious and deliberate policy, the surviving group has often regarded these natural processes of destruction with favour. Early American historians wrote the following with reference to the Indians:

There befell a great mortality among them; the greatest that ever the memory of father and son took notice of; desolating chiefly those places where the English afterward planted… By this means, Christ, whose great and glorious works throughout the world are all for the benefit of his churches and chosen, made room for his people.

Frequently, however, dominant groups have not had the faith that providence would exterminate the competitive minority, or they have been impatient with the slow pace at which the divine plan moved, and have, accordingly, taken the matter into their own hands. A new word, genocide, has been introduced into the language to designate the practice of deliberately annihilating entire racial and ethnic groups.

It was without doubt the deliberate policy of the Nazis to exterminate the Jewish people in their midst, and they came very near to succeeding.

The U.S.S.R has dealt similarly with troublesome and recalcitrant minorities. The Jews of Russia, who once numbered 5 million, are apparently on their way to extinction. Not that they are being physically exterminated, but policies are being imposed which make it impossible for them to perpetuate themselves as a group. Synagogues have been suppressed, Yiddish journals forbidden, publishing houses closed, religious marriage ceremonies discouraged, and a ban imposed upon religious schools where Jewish beliefs and traditions might be inculcated into the young.

While the term genocide may be of recent origin, the practice itself is an ancient one. The Bible records many instances of a stronger group exterminating its rivals (Deut 3:3 and 2 kings 15: 16); and the practice was followed by the Assyrians, Babylonians, and Egyptians. In more recent times the policy of seeking to solve a minority problem by annihilation has been attributed to the British in Tasmania, the Dutch in South Africa, and the Portuguese in Brazil.

v  EXPULSION

Racial and ethnic conflicts are often resolved when one group expels another from the territory in which it resides. For the victors the end result is comparable to that attained by annihilation, but the process is somewhat more humane, though mass expulsion is often carried out in an atmosphere of violence.

Expulsion is often resorted to when other methods of dealing with the minority have failed. There are instances where a minority has been driven from a country only after a policy of extermination had failed, or only after concerted efforts to assimilate have proved fruitless. Thus, at the dawn of the modern era, when Spanish rulers were determined to promote homogeneity in their realm, they attempted to convert the Jews to Christianity, and when that failed they expelled them.

Indeed, mass expulsion, as a method of solving minority problems, has never been more widely employed than it has in the 20th century, if one takes account of the transfer of populations in the Balkan states, the Jewish migrations to Palestine, the flight of Arabs from Israel, the escape of Muslims from India and of Hindus from Pakistan, and the millions of refugees, expellees, and escapees from fascist and communist dictatorships.

A classical example of mass expulsion, taken from American history, is that of the forced removal of the Cherokee Indians from their homes in the east. The magnitude of the injustice and the heavy toll of lives were such that the Indians to this day refer to the incident as “The Trail of Tears”. By 1825 the Eastern Band of the Cherokees had grown to 13,000 in number, owned millions of acres of land and more than 1000 Negro slaves, had established schools and churches, and operated prosperous farms. They managed their political affairs well, the nation was out of debt, and they were at peace. The tide turned when gold was discovered in the Georgia hills, in Cherokee territory. The whites were determined to get hold of it, and followed a variety of schemes to that end. Finally, Congress passed the Indian Removal Act, and General Winfield Scott moved in with 7,000 troops and an unruly mob of civilians. The Indians were burned and cattle and house hold goods were seized. The Indians were rounded up, homes and barns were burned and cattle and household goods were seized. The Indians were herded into stockades, conducted under guard down the Tennessee, Ohio, and Mississippi Rivers, and driven into the territory which now is Oklahoma. The cost of all this was charged to the Indians. President van Buren, in his message to congress on Dec 3, 1838, was able to report:

The measures for Cherokee removal authorized by congress at its last session have had the happiest effects…. The Cherokees have emigrated without any apparent reluctance.

A more recent instance of mass expulsion occurred during World War II when some 110,000 persons of Japanese ancestry (Nisei) were forcibly evacuated from the area of the United States bordering the Pacific, including parts of Washington, Oregon, California, and Arizona. Sensibly this was nothing more than war time measure undertaken in the interest of national security, but actually, in the perspective of time, it appears to have been one more chapter in the long struggle between whites and Japanese. The attack upon Pearl Harbour gave the anti- Japanese forces a rare opportunity. Rumours of espionage and sabotage began to circulate. None was proved valid. Finally, as a result of numerous pressures upon the president, an executive order was issued authoring the War Department to set up military areas and to exclude from such areas any persons regarded as dangerous. On a date fixed by the army, all persons of Japanese lineage were required to report to control stations, whence they were escorted to improvised assembly centre, and later to more permanent relocation camps.

v  STRATIFICATION

This is the process of dividing society into ranks, grades, or positions, and involves the unequal distribution of privileges, duties, responsibilities, power, prestige and influence. Quite apart from the area of minority problems, this process of arranging individuals and groups of a society on horizontal levels operates wherever people try to work out a common life together. Perfect equality prevails nowhere, except in the dreams of utopian philosophers. The fact is that in every society there are various tasks that have to be done, and very early in human history it was discovered that specialization and division of labour make for greater efficiency. Furthermore, some of the tasks which have to be performed are more difficult than others, some more appealing, and some distasteful. The problem, therefore, which every society has to solve, is this: How to distribute these various functions, how to assign people to their special roles.

Now there are only two ways in which to meet the problem:

(1) Permit everyone to compete, in the hope that each will thereby come to perform the functions for which his interests and abilities fit him. This is the essence of democracy– equal opportunity for every individual to compete for the role and status he desires, regardless of his race, religion, sex, or family.

(2) Assign everyone to some social role or roles, using as the basis for the assignment some easily ascertainable feature such as age, family, sex or skin colour. This on the other hand carried to its logical extreme, is that of caste, wherein the individuals status, role and various other aspects of his life are determined at birth and remain fixed through life.

Both these methods have been widely employed, and both have proved equal to the job of getting a society’s work done. The fact of the matter is that no society operates entirely on either of these principles. Even the most democratic makes a practice of ascribing some roles and statuses, the most cast- ridden societies have a certain degree of flexibility.

Wherever racial and ethnic groups come into contact the process of stratification operates. The form that stratification takes, however, varies from one situation to another and from time to time. The relations between groups may assume the rigid feature of slavery or caste, the flexibility of class, or the subtleties of “gentlemen’s agreements” or simple discrimination.

v  SEGREGATION

Unlike groups faced with the problem of living together with a minimum of conflict, many resolve their difficulties by resorting to some form of segregation.

Segregation means isolation and may be either voluntary or involuntary. The former is illustrated by the Amish, who have chosen to withdraw into isolated communities rather than to succumb to almost inevitable assimilation which they would regard as a calamity.

The segregation of the American Negro contrariwise is not of his own choice. Unlike the Amish and the Chinese, he wants to attend the theatre, join labour unions, participate in politics, escape residential restrictions, use the public services, acquire education, enter the occupation of his choice, and otherwise participate fully in the life of the nation. In all these areas, however, he finds himself circumscribed and excluded and he accordingly wages an incessant war against the restrictions which isolate him and prevent his social participation.

In the Republic of South Africa the dominant whites have openly and vigorously espoused a policy of segregation, which they call apartheid, in order better to preserve white supremacy and to hold in subordination the natives, the mixed bloods, and the Indians and other Asiatic who grew early, outnumber them and who, they feel, threaten the European way of life.

v  ASSIMILATION

Riots, lynching, mass expulsions, segregation and discrimination are among the phenomena of intergroup relations which catch the public’s eye, while assimilation, a less conspicuous consequence of the meeting of peoples, is probably more significant in the long run. Assimilation denotes the process whereby groups which differ culturally come to have a common culture. This means not merely such tangible items of culture as dress, utensils, food, sports, etc but also those nonmaterial items such as values, memories, sentiments, ideas, attitudes, and traditions. Assimilation must be distinguished from naturalization, a political concept denoting the act or process of admitting an alien to the state and privileges of a citizen. Americanization is simply a special case of assimilation, and refers to the process whereby a person of some foreign heritage acquires the customs, ideals, and loyalties of American society, just as Europeanization, Russianisation, and Germanisation, denote similar processes with respect to those cultures.

The various racial and ethnic groups which have come to the United States differ widely in the rapidity with which they become assimilated. It is a common place observation that British immigrants are quickly and readily absorbed, while others become assimilated more slowly. The uninformed make much of this fact, inferring that some groups possess an innate quality of “assimilability” which others are “unassimilable” and insisting that the rate with which one assimilates is proof of inherent superiority.

There is certainly no single explanation for the fact that some groups assimilate more rapidly than others, but rather a number of interacting factors must be taken into consideration. Among these factors are:

  1. The attitudes of the dominant group towards the newcomers;
  2. The attitudes of the minority with respect to the desirability of becoming assimilated;
  3. The degree of similarity of the culture (especially of languages) and groups in contact.
  4. The racial characteristics of the groups involved, or the “visibility” of the minority
  5. The relative numbers involved.
  6. The rate of entrance of the minority.
  7. The manner of settlement, whether rural or urban.
  8. The age and sex composition of the groups. and
  9. The role of leaders, either in opposing or encouraging assimilation.

v  PLURALISM

A social organization in which diversity of racial, religious, ethnic or cultural groups is tolerated.

Many have insisted that it is possible for peoples who are different to live together on a basis of equality, tolerance, justice, and harmony. This involves, of course, a degree of voluntary segregation, but without the prejudices and discriminations that usually go with segregation. The idea is included in the in the concept “separate but equal” and is sometimes referred to as “cultural dualism” or “cultural democracy”.

Its proponents maintain that contact between unlike groups need not result in perpetual conflict, or in the relationship of superior and inferior, nor is it either necessary or inevitable that different cultures become fused into one. Those who advocate pluralism as the most desirable pattern of ethnic group adjustment recognize that there are limits beyond which cultural freedom cannot go, if a society is to function. Any society, to survive, must have a considerable agreement among its members as to basic ideals, goals, values, morals and beliefs. An aggregation of individuals or of groups, each with its own language, gods, customs, and traditions, would not be a society at all. Ethnic groups which differ radically in their fundamental value systems could hardly become accommodated on a plane of equality and tolerance.

In defining the Rights of the Minorities therefore we can be branch them into two sections which are the rights that each individual becomes entitled to just at the mere fact of being human and the whole minorities’ groups rights. The purpose of the right of the minorities is to ensure that they are able to achieve equality, identity, participation to all spheres of life and are protected from persecution, discrimination and deaths as well as enjoying all the other human rights.

THE HUMAN RIGHTS IN QUESTION

They include the following indivisible, interdependent and interrelated human rights:

v  The freedom from any distinction, exclusion, restriction which has the purpose or effect of impairing the enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms.

v  Right of members of minorities to freedom from discrimination.

v  Right of each member of a minority to equal recognition as a person before the law, to equality before the courts, and to equal protection of the law.

v  Right of all members of minorities to participate effectively in cultural, religious, social, economic and public life.

v  Right of members of minorities to freedom of association.

v  Right of minorities to exist.

The constitution of Kenya 2010 and protection of minorities: Chapter 4 part 3 of the constitution of Kenya is entirely about special application of rights to children, persons with disabilities, the youth, minorities and marginalized groups and older members of the society, all whom are part of the minorities going by our definition. Quoting from Chapter 4 Part 3 Article 56 of the constitution:

“The State shall put in place affirmative action programmes

designed to ensure that minorities and marginalised groups—

(a) participate and are represented in governance and other

spheres of life;

(b) are provided special opportunities in educational and

economic fields;

(c) are provided special opportunities for access to

employment;

(d) develop their cultural values, languages and practices;

and

(e) have reasonable access to water, health services and

Infrastructure”

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Rights of the Minorities 1948: Article 2 states that, “Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.”

Subsequent human rights standards that codify minority rights include:

  • The rights of ethnic and racial minorities are also protected in the International Human Rights Law as follows:
    • The right to be protected from racial discrimination, hatred and violence.
    • Right to equal protection before the law irrespective of racial or ethnic origin.
    • The right of racial and ethnic groups to enjoy their own culture, practice their own religion and use their own language.
    • Right to benefit from positive steps taken by the state to promote racial harmony and the rights of racial minorities.
    • Right to seek asylum for reasons of a well-founded fear of persecution on the grounds of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion and the right to remedies.

Attempts to codify the rights of sexual minorities in international human rights law have met strong opposition from a number of member states of the United Nations and different the media within countries.

REDUCING YOURSEXUAL RISK

HIV can be spread by having unprotected
sexual contact with an HIV-positive person.
“Unprotected” means sex (anal, oral, or
vaginal) without barrier protection, like a
condom.
Some of the ways to reduce your risk of
getting HIV through sexual contact include:

Don’t have sex. Sex (anal, oral, or
vaginal) is the main way that HIV is
transmitted. If you aren’t having sexual
contact, you are 100% protected from
getting HIV in that way.

Be monogamous. Being monogamous
means: 1) You are in a sexual
relationship with only one person and 2)
Both of you are having sex only with
each other. Having only one sex partner
reduces your risk of getting HIV—but
monogamy won’t protect you completely
unless you know for sure that both you
and your partner are not infected with
HIV.

Get tested and know your partner’s
status : Knowing your own status is
important for both your health and the
health of your partner. Talking about
your HIV status can be difficult or
uncomfortable—but it’s important to
start the discussion BEFORE you have
sex.
You need to ask your sexual partners:
Have you been tested for HIV?
When was the last time you had an
HIV test?
What were the results of your HIV
test?
If you have more than one sex partner,
the CDC recommends that you be tested
for HIV and other sexually
transmitted infections (STIs) every
3-6 months.

Use condoms consistently and
correctly . To reduce your risk of getting
HIV or other STIs, you must use a new
condom with every act of anal, oral, or
vaginal sex. You also have to use
condoms correctly, to keep them from
slipping off or breaking.
You have to use the right kind of
condom too. Latex condoms are highly
effective against HIV. (If you are allergic
to latex, you can use polyurethane or
polyisoprene condoms.) Lambskin
condoms will NOT protect you from HIV,
because the virus is small enough to slip
through lambskin.
You should always use a water-based
lubricant when you use a condom for
anal or vaginal sex. Lubricants reduce
friction and help keep the condom from
breaking. Do NOT use an oil-based
lubricant (like petroleum jelly, hand
lotion, or cooking oil). Oil-based
lubricants can damage condoms and
make them less effective.
Both male condoms and female
condoms will help protect you against
HIV and other STl. You are
ALWAYS safer using a condom! But you can
get certain STIs, like herpes or HPV,
from contact with your partner’s bare
skin, even if one of you is wearing a
condom. Condoms lessen the risk of
infection even for those types of STIs.
Condoms with the spermicide
Nonoxynol-9 are NOT recommended
for STI/HIV prevention. Nonoxynol-9
(N9) irritates rectal and vaginal walls,
which increases the chance of HIV
infection if infected body fluids do come
in contact with them.

All sexual practices can be made “safer”—
meaning you can lower your risk of
transmitting/contracting STIs and HIV—but
some activities are much safer than others.
Here’s a list of sexual activities and the risks
they pose for transmitting HIV or other STIs:

Receptive Anal Sex (Bottoming)
The odds of getting HIV from
“bottoming” without a condom are
higher than any other sexual behavior.
HIV has been found in pre-cum (pre-
ejaculatory fluid), so having your partner
pull out before he cums (ejaculates) may
not decrease your risk.
Do not douche before sex. Douching
irritates the lining of your rectum and
this can increase your risk for getting
HIV. If you are concerned about
cleanliness, clean the rectum gently,
with a soapy finger and water.
If you are bottoming, always use plenty
of water-based lubricant with a latex,
polyurethane, or polyisoprene condom.
This will help to minimize damage to the
rectum during sex and to prevent the
transmission of STIs (including HIV).
Insertive Anal Sex (Topping)

“Topping” without a condom is
considered a high-risk behavior for
transmission of HIV and other STIs.
Your partner may have sores or other
signs of infection in his/her rectum that
you can’t see. If you have tears or cuts
on your penis, HIV can enter your body
this way.
It is possible for blood and other fluids
containing HIV to infect the cells in the
urethra of your penis.

Receptive Vaginal Sex (Risks For Women)
Vaginal sex without a condom is
considered a high-risk behavior for HIV
infection.
During vaginal sex, HIV is transmitted
from men to women much more easily
than from women to men.
The risk for transmission is increased if
you currently have another STI or
vaginal infection. Many STIs and vaginal
infections are “silent”—meaning you
don’t have any symptoms, so you may
not be aware that you are infected.
Many barrier methods that are used to
prevent pregnancy (diaphragm, cervical
cap, etc.) DO NOT protect against STIs
or HIV infection because they still allow
infected semen to come in contact with
the lining of your vagina.
Oral or hormonal contraceptives (i.e.,
birth control pills) DO NOT protect
against STIs or HIV infection.
Female condoms DO prevent against HIV
infection, if you use them correctly and
consistently.

Insertive Vaginal Sex (Risks For Men)
Unprotected vaginal sex is less risky for
the male partner than the female
partner—but there is still a risk that the
male partner can contract HIV and other
STIs.
Some STIs are “silent,” meaning that a
woman may have an STI but not have
any symptoms. Your partner may not
know she has an infection, so it is
important to use a condom.
Use a new condom with a water-based
lubricant every time you have insertive
vaginal sex to prevent STIs, including
HIV.
Performing Oral Sex On A Man
You can get HIV by performing oral sex
on your male partner, although the risk
is not as great as it is with unprotected
anal or vaginal sex.
You are also at risk for getting other
STIs, like chlamydia and gonorrhea.
Your risk of contracting HIV is reduced if
your male partner does not ejaculate
(cum) in your mouth.
Your risk of HIV is reduced if you do not
have open sores or cuts in your mouth.
Using condoms for oral sex reduces your
risk of getting HIV or other STIs.
Receiving Oral Sex If You Are A Man
There is less associated risk for HIV
infection with this sexual activity.
Your risk of HIV is reduced if you do not
have open sores or cuts on your penis.
There is a risk of contracting other STIs,
including herpes.
Performing Oral Sex On A Woman
HIV has been found in vaginal
secretions, so there is a risk of
contracting HIV from this activity.
It is possible to contract other STIs from
this activity.
There are effective barriers you can use
to protect you from contact with your
partner’s vaginal fluids. You can cut
open an unlubricated condom and lay it
over your partner’s vulva. You can also
use dental dams or non-microwaveable
plastic wrap to protect against HIV and
other STIs. (Plastic wrap that can be
microwaved will not protect you—
viruses are small enough to pass
through that type of wrap.)

Receiving Oral Sex If You Are A Woman
The risk for contracting HIV this way is
significantly lower than for unprotected
vaginal sex.
There is still a risk of contracting other
STIs, like herpes, and bacterial
infections.
You should use a barrier method (cut-
open unlubricated condom, dental dam,
or non-microwaveable plastic wrap) over
your vulva to protect yourself from STIs.

Oral-Anal Contact (Rimming)
The risk of getting HIV by rimming is
very low—but this kind of sexual contact
comes with a high risk of transmitting
hepatitis A and B, parasites, and other
bacteria to the partner who is doing the
rimming.
You should use a barrier method (cut-
open unlubricated condom, dental dam,
or non-microwaveable plastic wrap) over
the anus to protect against infection.

Digital Stimulation (Fingering)
There is a very small risk of getting HIV
from fingering your partner if you have
cuts or sores on your fingers and your
partner has cuts or sores in the rectum
or vagina.
Use medical-grade gloves and lots of
water-based lubricant to eliminate this
risk.

Sex Toys
Using sex toys can be a safe practice, as
long as you do not share your toys with
your partner.
If you share your toy with your partner,
use a condom on the toy, if possible,
and change the condom before your
partner uses it.
Clean your toys with soap and water, or
a stronger disinfectant if indicated on
the cleaning instructions. It is important
to do this after each use!

SAFER-SEX ACTIVITIES
These activities carry no risk of HIV
transmission:
Non-sexual massage
Casual or dry kissing
Masturbation (without your partner’s
body fluids)
Frottage—also known as “dry humping”
or body-to-body rubbing
You can still contract other STIs, like herpes,
HPV, or pubic lice (“crabs”) if you have bare
skin-to-skin contact with your partner.

Source: aids.gov

PLAY TITLE: WEDDING IN COURT PLAYWRIGHT: NGORU SOLOMON IRUNGU

PLAY TITLE:	WEDDING IN COURT PLAYWRIGHT: NGORU SOLOMON IRUNGU

SYNOPSIS
The play is in a court setting where Kenneth Dixter has been accused of several crimes against the state and civil wrongs against Solomon and his fiancée Nancy. Dixter seems to be winning the case until the prosecuting counsel brings vindicating evidence that turns the whole case around to see Dixter given a mind torturing punishment before being sentenced. This exonerating evidence is the heart of the play as it amalgamates a complicated love story, blackmails, humour, suspense and a colourful wedding that never was. This works in a flashback and forth style, play within a play and an instance where the play starts at the end and rolls backwards.

LIST OF CHARACTERS
NANCY Venus (Lady to be married)
Solomon Potter (Groom-to-be)
Kenneth Dixter (The prosecuted)
Judge
Prosecuting and defence counsel
Court secretary
Elder ( Solomon’s father)
Pastor (Kenneth’s father)
Villagers
Voices

ACT 1
PROLOGUE

(From the audience, Kimash and some agitated villagers frog-march Kenneth Dixter towards the stage)
KIMASH:
We want him crushed! Flat to the ground!
VILLAGERS:
Yes! Flat to the ground!
KIMASH:
We want him crushed! Flat to the ground!
VILLAGERS:
Yes! Flat to the ground!
KENNETH
What? Please. You mean Solomon is…
KIMASH:
Oh, yes, he is…alive. Now come, you tormenter of souls, to the Court of justice of love!
VILLAGERS:
Yes! To the Courts of justice!
NANCY
(Entering from the stage) No! Wait! Please wait. Let the young man be!
VILLAGERS:
What! Aaii!
KIMASH:
No Nancy! Not after all he did to you! Not after what he did to me. We almost died remember?
NANCY
Yes my Love…
KIMASH:
Then why my Love? Let us deal with him perpendicularly!
VILLAGERS:
Yes! Perpendicularly!
NANCY
No my Love…Give him a chance let him open the curtains to the past!
VILLAGERS:
The past? Oh no! Not again!
NANCY
Yes, the past explains the present and defines the future. Ladies and Gentlemen, here comes the court, let’s all gather in the court of justice of love!
VILLAGERS:
(As they chant away to the stage) We want him crushed! Flat to the ground! Yes, flat to the ground! We want him crushed! Flat to the ground! (Fading) We want him crushed! Flat to the ground! We want him crushed! Flat to the ground!
ALL:
We present…WEDDING IN COURT!

SCENE ONE
(Curtains open, a court setting is visible. The defence and prosecuting counsel are in their postions. Mr Dixter in the docks)

COURT SECRETARY:
All arise, court in session, Justice Winnie Pharis presiding.
JUDGE:
(Enters and takes position) In the matter of Mr. Solomon Potter and the state versus Mr. Kenneth Dixter,(Facing Kenneth) Mr. Kenneth Dixter…
KENNETH
Yes your honour…
JUDGE:
You are here-by charged with the illegal interference of Solomon’s wedding, attempted murder, illegal possession of fire arms, causing public unrest and attempting to marry one Ms NANCY Venus against her will. This is contrary to(Flipping through the pages of a book) chapter four article 45, article 26 and articles 28, 36 and 39 respectively of the constitution of this land. Do you still maintain your plea of not guilty?
KENNETH
Yes your honour!
JUDGE:
Defence Counsel…
DEFENCE COUNSEL:
Yes your honour.
JUDGE:
To What are your concluding remarks?
DEFENCE COUNSEL:
Thank you your honour. You honour, my client here, Mr. Kenneth Dixter is wrongly accused here-in of crimes and civil wrongs that he never committed. In fact if pulling a beautiful naive young girl from the jaws of an uncivilized wedding where there is no love is wrong, then I…
PROCECUTING COUNSEL:
Objection your honour! Enticing one with the prospects of ones authority and all the aforementioned wrongs only to abuse ones dignity is with all intent and purposes a crime your honour!
JUDGE:
Objection overruled! Defence Counsel, you may proceed!
PROCECUTING COUNSEL:
Your honour, my client here has a bad stomach, we have to hurry the case or else…
JUDGE:
Order! Order in my court!
DEFENCE COUNSEL:
Thank you your honour, based on all the evidence adduced here in this court, my client is clearly innocent and should be acquitted of all charges! I rest my case.
JUDGE:
Prosecuting counsel?
PROCECUTING COUNSEL:
Yes your honour.
JUDGE:
You may proceed.

PROCECUTING COUNSEL:
Thank you your honour. Your honour, the prosecuting counsel would like to call in, its surprise witnesses if it pleases the court!
DEFENCE COUNSEL:
Objection you honour!
JUDGE:
Objection Overruled! If the potential witnesses have the ability to turn this entire case around, then so be it! Prosecuting counsel, you may proceed.
PROCECUTING COUNSEL:
Thank you your honour. I hereby call to the stands Ms NANCY Venus!
KENNETH
What?!
DEFENCE COUNSEL:
Objection Your honour!
JUDGE:
Overrulled! (Enters Nancy) Prosecuting Counsel, please proceed.
PROCECUTING COUNSEL:
Thank you your honour! (To the Nancy) Nancy.
NANCY
Yes your honour.
PROCECUTING COUNSEL:
Do you swear to tell this honorable court the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
NANCY
Yes your honour.
PROCECUTING COUNSEL:
Please proceed.

ACT 2
SCENE 1
FLASHBACK
(Music plays as the court setting changes into a village setting. Blue lighting fills the stage.)
NANCY
(In soliloquy amid soft music. NANCY is singing)
Oh, don’t I look gorgeous, this beautiful Venus girl of Kimash!
Look at my body, my complexion, height and beauty,
not to mention this sweet heart that Kimash really treasures.
I just came from the salon,
don’t you love my hair style-a combination of blow-dry, pussy-cat and mosodo.
Don’t I look like a real illusion?n instrument that you will love the percussion?
I am the real salvation, for the redemption of the affliction,
of course the solution… for Kimash.
KENNETH
(Enters whistling. Music stops) The fantasies of the book you gave me have been overcome by your pressure on me to return it.
NANCY
Njoro, what are you doing here?
(Asides) coming to spoil my time as I wait for my love.
KENNETH
Oh, what a question, you know I am your love and…
NANCY
Your what? Listen Njoro, I have told you time and again, I have a lover, my wonderful Kimash…
KENNETH
(Laughing hysterically)Hear even the name, Solomon Potter, (laughs sarcastically) Potter…What is it with you that guy? He has no swag, doesn’t know how to dress, dance, walk, or even talk.(Laughs)Look at me, I am swaggarific, so swaggarific.
NANCY
Well, will I eat swag? Will swag take me out; pay my bills or treat me well? Will swag love me? Can I love swag back? Will swag make love to me?
KENNETH
What?
NANCY
Well, take it or swallow it, Kimash and I are getting married in a couple of days.
KENNETH
So, this is true? I knew it, but you know what, unless my father is not the high pastor of this village, and you know that no other person can legalise the wedding. My father knows I want you.
NANCY
(Asides)You see, he wants me, he doesn’t love me, just wants me.
KENNETH
(Asides)If only I could get this beauty for a night.
The wedding will not continue!
NANCY
The wedding will continue!

KENNETH
The wedding will not continue!
NANCY
I said the wedding will continue! And you think you are intelligent?
(Asides)This is a ndongomothi, salamander, the leg of a fish!
Well, I am very sure you will succeed, because you know Kimash’s father is not the elder of the village.
KENNETH
And what will that feeble man do? Elder, elder, elder means nothing!
NANCY
You really think so? Look at what happened then…
(They freeze as the pastor, Kenneth Dixter’s father and the elder, Solomon’s father appear on stage)
SCENE 2
PLAY WITHIN A PLAY
PASTOR:
(Reciting in Latin) Ave Maria…SOME LINES MISSIN
ELDER:
SOME LINES MISSING
PASTOR:
Oh, surely, God is great! What brings you to my house today elderly man? (Sarcastically) What have I done to deserve such honours?
ELDER:
I know you are a powerful man, they call you a total man, very holy, the high pastor, the only one in the village and my visit here is a privilege to you!
PASTOR:
Privilege? What privilege elder?
ELDER:
Well, you know you are the only one who can grace weddings in this village, and my daughter NANCY Venus is getting married. This will earn you reputation as the officiator of weddings.
PASTOR:
Of course I know Venus is getting married, but we have not planned for it.
ELDER:
I know of your plot with your son, but you will not succeed! This wedding must continue!
PASTOR:
The wedding will not continue!
ELDER:
The wedding will continue!
PASTOR:
The wedding will not continue, you parrot!
ELDER:
Oh, yes, the wedding will continue! Who is the loudest man in the village? Whose
voice is heard most in the village? Who is the most trusted man in the village?
PASTOR:
Definitely it is you elder, but what has that to do with my word that this wedding
will not continue?
SCENE 3
FLASHFORWARD
ELDER:
(Calling)My people, gracious people of Kitambaya?
VOICES:
Yes mzee.
ELDER:
(Amid murmurs) Do you want to know how Pastor Nathaniel Dixter got to this village?
VOICES:
Yes mzee.
ELDER:
He was excommunicated from his village for killing his wife. He also sodomised young boys who came for catechism. He introduced his son Kenneth Dixter to drugs. And he has been embezzling the church funds.
VOICES:
Yes mzee.
ELDER:
Don’t you think he deserves castigation, preferably burning him?
VOICES:
Yes mzee. Burn him! Burn him! Burn him! (Fading) Burn him! Burn him!
PASTOR:
(Amid the noises) This is not true, he is only here to malign my name.
ELDER:
(Calling)My people, gracious people of Kitambaya?
VOICES:
Yes mzee. (Amplified voices) Burn him! Burn him! Burn him! (Fading) Burn him! Burn him!
ELDER:
(Amid murmurs) Well, listen to the voices. The voices and noises. Noises of them without choices… (Laughs)
END OF FLASHFORWARD
SCENE 4
PASTOR:
Are you trying to blackmail me?
ELDER:
Blackmail, white mail, blue mail, blueprint, whatever you call it, this wedding must continue. The people of Kitambaya will believe me.
PASTOR:
You win! Don’t try to tarnish my name. This wedding takes place in a couple of days, presided by I and nobody will stop it!
(They exit)
END OF PLAY WITHIN A PLAY

SCENE 5
NANCY
(Sarcastically)Surely this wedding will not continue!
KENNETH
I have to see my father. (Exits)
KIMASH:
Oh, my angel, you really look gorgeous today…as always. You are fearfully and wonderfully made, but you are more wonderfully made than fearfully. You are not fearful darling, I beg to object that.

NANCY
(Embracing him)Solomon…
KIMASH:
Sshhh…Kimash!
NANCY
My Kimash…hahaha, you have swag.
KIMASH:
Let us leave honey and get ready for the wedding. (They exit)

SCENE 6
(Wedding setting. Music, today is my wedding day)
PASTOR:
Dearly beloved, we are all gathered here in this holy ceremonial matrimonial ceremony, to celebrate the union in marriage between one…NANCY Venus and Solomon Potter…who also happens to be the son of our village elder…Mr. Onesmus Potter. We always say, “What the Lord has coalesced, let no thunder put asunder!”,but if there is anyone with an objection towards this union, let them speak now, or hold their peace forever.
(Silence. A young man stands and walks towards the couple. Everyone is perplexed. He moves and takes a photo then goes back to his seat. People laugh and clap)
If that is so, I hereby declare you…
(A gunshot is heard. Everyone is gasps)
KENNETH
(Enters holding a gun) The wedding will not continue! This is supposed to be my girl.
(Everyone tries to speak telling him to put the fire arm down)
Let not anyone dare to come near me. I must kill this girl.(He raises his gun and points it towards Nancy)
EVERYONE:
No!No…

SLOWMOTION AMID DRUMS
(Kenneth shoots at NANCY but Kimash jumps infront and the bullet hits him. Kenneth shoots again and Kimash does the same. NANCY collapses down as Kimash lies aside with blood oozing. Kenneth tries shooting again but his gun has no bullets. He starts running away. Some agitated villagers run after him. Meanwhile NANCY nurses Potter who wakes and follows the villagers leaving Nancy)
(After a while, from the audience, Kimash and some agitated villagers frog-march Kenneth Dixter towards the stage)

ACT 3
SCENE I

KIMASH:
We want him crushed! Flat to the ground!
VILLAGERS:
Yes! Flat to the ground!
KENNETH
What? Please. You mean Solomon is…
KIMASH:
Oh, yes, he is…alive. Now come, you tormenter of souls, to the Court of justice of love!
VILLAGERS:
Yes! To the Courts of justice!
NANCY
(Entering) No! Wait! Please wait. Let the young man be!
VILLAGERS:
What! Aaii!
KIMASH:
No Nancy! Not after all he did to you! Not after what he did to me. We almost died remember?
NANCY
Yes my Love…
KIMASH:
Then why my Love? Let us deal with him perpendicularly!
VILLAGERS:
Yes! Perpendicularly!
NANCY
No my Love…Give him a chance let him open the curtains to the past!
VILLAGERS:
The past? Oh no! Not again!
NANCY
Yes, the past explains the present and defines the future. Ladies and Gentlemen, here comes the court, let’s all gather in the court of justice of love!
VILLAGERS:
(As they chant away to the stage) We want him crushed! Flat to the ground! Yes, flat to the ground! We want him crushed! Flat to the ground! (Fading) We want him crushed! Flat to the ground! We want him crushed! Flat to the ground!
END OF FLASHBACK

SCENE 2
(Back to court setting)
NANCY
Your honour, that is the true account of all that happened up to when we brought the culprit here. Thank you your honour. Thank you counsel
PROCECUTING COUNSEL:
Thank you Ms. Nancy. Your honour, my witness testimony has just proven to us beyond reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty of charged!
KENNETH
Lies! All that are lies your honour!
NANCY
Please taste a dose of your own medicine in silence Dixter!
KENNETH
You are only out to malign my name!
JUDGE:
Order in my court! Kenneth Dixter, you are here-by charged with…
(Kenneth whispers something to the defense counsel)
PROCECUTING COUNSEL:
Your honour, my client here has a bad stomach, we request that he goes for a call before the verdict…
JUDGE:
(To the prosecuting council) Overruled! Let him wait for the verdict.(To the defendant) Kenneth Dixter, you are here-by charged with the illegal interference of Solomon’s wedding, attempted murder, illegal possession of fire arms, causing public unrest and attempting to marry Ms NANCY Venus against her will.
Following the evidence given here-in, this honorable court rules in favour of the plaintiff and it hereby finds you guilty as charged.
You are hereby sentenced to attending the wedding and seeing Potter kiss the bride.
Further to that you shall serve life imprisonment with hard labour! Case closed! The court has now allowed the defendant to take the call before being taken to the cells and adjourning the session.
(Kenneth is taken out by the court Askari. After a moment of silence and murmurs, the askari returns)
ASKARI:
Your… Your honour…He…He has escaped!
COURT ATTENDANTS:
What?
(Everyone arises and starts exiting in slow motion. A dying closure of music)

THE END

Copyright Protected 2012

THE SAD STORY BEHIND THE SEND-OFF PAKCAGE BY KENYAN MPs

THE SAD STORY BEHIND THE SEND-OFF PAKCAGE BY KENYAN MPs

We have a rogue parliament; there is no other way to describe it. The nation’s attention is captured by the matter of MPs defecting from political parties and creating or joining others without giving up their seats in parliament. This country, through its legislators, has turned into a lawless state, where every law that is not convenient to the desires and whims of a politician is flouted, ignored, broken, dismissed.
Our constitution is not respected; our legislative institutions are abused by almost all of them.
Our nation is plagued by poor leadership, and we the ordinary citizens had hoped that a new constitution would bring an end to the plunder we have endured since independence. Our constitution is not respected; our legislative institutions are abused by ALL of them.Our nation is plagued by poor leadership, and we the ordinary citizens had hoped that a new constitution would bring an end to the plunder we have endured since independence
These are the MPs who passed the Bill for the send off package in parliament. Judge for yourselves. the list even has esteemed lawyers and other professionals.
Zack was pushing his wheelchair 3912KM to South Africa to raise KSh. 250,000,000 to build a Spinal Cord Injury Rehabilitation Center.
After 5 years of sitting on the lazy chairs that cost Kenyans KSh. 84,000,000, our MPs are going home with a sweet send-off package of KSh 2,100,000,000. this is enough to build 8 Spinal Injury Rehab Centers, train 403 Doctors from Primary School to University, equip 34 Radio
Therapy Units, build 2 National Level Referral Hospitals, equip Theaters for 100 Hospitals, supply Infant Vaccines for 3 years.
1 Abdalla Amina Ali.
2 Abdi Nasir.
3 Abdul Bahari.
4 Abu Mohamed Chiaba.
5 Adan Keynan Wehliye.
6 Alex Muthengi Mburi Mwiru.
7 Andrew Calist Mwatela.
8 Asman Abongotum Kamama.
9 Atanas Manyala Keya.
10 Bare Aden Duale.
11 Barnabas Muturi C. Mwangi
12 Beth Wambui Mugo.
13 Bifwoli, Wakoli Sylvester.
14 Boni Khalwale (Dr.)
15 Cecily Mutitu Mbarire.
16 Charles Cheruiyot Keter.
17 Clement Muchiri.
18 Daniel Mutua Muoki.
19 David Njuguna Kiburi.
20 Elijah Kiptarbei Lagat.
21 Emilio Mureithi Kathuri.
22 Empraim Mwangi Maina.
23 Erastus Kihara Mureithi.
24 Esther Murugi Mathenge.
25 Ethuro, David Ethuro.
26 Eugene Ludovic Wamalwa.
27 Francis Chachu.
28 Francis S. K. Baya
29 Frankilin Mithika Linturi.
30 Githae Robinson Njeru.
31 Githu Muigai (Prof.)
Attorney General Ex-Officio.
32 Hellen Jepkemoi Sambili.
33 Hussein Mohamed Abdikadir.
34 Hussein Tarry Sasura.
35 Ibrabim Elmi Mohamed.
36 Isaac Kiprono Rutto.
37 Isaac Mulatya Muoki.
38 Jackson Kiplagat Kiptanui.
39 James G. Kwanya
40 Jamleck Irungu Kamau.
41 Japhet M. Kareke Mbiuki
42 Jeremiah Ngayu Kioni.
43 John Michael Njenga Mututho.
44 Johnson Nduya Muthama.
45 Joseph Nganga Kiuna.
46 Josephat Nanok Koli.
47 Joshua Serem Kutuny.
48 Kilimo, Linah Jebi.
49 Kilonzo Charles Mutavi.
50 Kiunjuri, Festus Mwangi.
51 Kuti, Mohammed. Abdi
52 Lee Maiyani Kinyanjui.
53 Lenny Maxwell Kivuti.
54 Lewis Nguyai.
55 Mahamud Muhumed Sirat.
56 Maitha Gideon Mungáro.
57 Manson Nyamweya.
58 Mbau, Elias Peter.
59 Mohamed Hussein Ali.
60 Mohamed, Muhamud.
61 Moses K. Lessone
62 Moses Somoine ole Sakuda.
63 Mungatana, Danson.
64 Munya Peter Gatirau.
65 Musila, David.
66 Mutava Musyimi.
67 Mwalimu Masudi Mwahima.
68 Mwiria, Valerian Kilemi.
69 Ndambuki, Gideon Musyoka.
70 Ndiritu Muriithi.
71 Nemesyus Warugongo.
72 Ntoitha M”Mithiaru.
73 Peter L.N. Kiilu
74 Peter Mungai Mwathi.
75 Peter Njoroge Baiya.
76 Peter Njuguna Gitau.
77 Richard Momoima Onyonka.
78 Robert Onsare Monda.
79 Samuel Kazungu Kambi.
80 Shaban, Naomi Namsi.
81 Silas Muriuki Ruteere.
82 Tirus Nyinge Ngahu.
83 Wavinya Ndeti.
84 William C. Kipkiror
85 Yakub Mohammad.
86 Yusuf Hassan Abdi.
SOURCES: Miguna At Miguna; Julls Mumo