1. COMMITTEE AGAINST TORTURE EXAMINES REPORT OF KENYA
The Committee against Torture was assembled for its 50th
session the 15th
of May of
2013 at 10 AM with the purpose of evaluating Kenya’s implementation of measures
regarding its agreement to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman
or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and the subsequent progress these measures
had created in society. This was Kenya’s 2nd
report, the first one having taken place in
2008.
Claudio Grossman, the Committee Chairman, started the session by thanking the
delegation of Kenya for its presence and explaining what kind of structure this session
would have. The delegation of Kenya would have 15 minutes to introduce their report.
Once they were finished the two special rapporteurs designated to evaluate Kenya’s
report would take the floor to express their observations and ask the questions they
might have for the delegation, too. Thereupon, different member of the committee
would be able to take the floor in case they wanted to express their concern upon
different themes.
Report of Kenya
Githu Muigai, head member of the delegation of Kenya, introduced all the member of
the delegation before starting to present their report. Mr Muigai reaffirmed Kenya’s
agreement to the Convention against Torture, and started listing the major reforms
and actions the party state had effectuated. He stated that Kenya had made significant
progress since the previous report. Freedom from torture was now a non-derogable
right in Kenya, as it was written into their national Constitution, which also contained
an encouraging Bill of Rights that was thoroughly respected by the law. This was
possible as a result of the multiple institutional reforms they had carried.
Amongst these reforms, Mr. Muigai emphasized the importance of the annexes they
had included to their 2010 Constitution so as: the right to a fair trial, the right to
freedom and security, and particularly, the reform of the police organism and its
mechanisms. Remarking upon this last point, Mr. Muigai exposed a great deal of
measures that had taken including the training of police officers to avoid torture and

2. the compromise of said institution to neutralize it, standing as an organization
established to defend the people from it. Mr. Muigai followed up by reporting the
state of their prisons, where a favorable treatment to detainees was secured.
Howeever, Mr. Muigai acknowledged that human rights were not always respected, so
for that matter they had created an independent institution dedicated to the
prosecution of any perpetrator of violent acts. Prior to finishing his report reassuring
Kenya’s willingness to keep working toward the protection of democracy and human
rights, Mr. Muigai spoke about the status of the vast amount of refugees, mostly from
the horn of Africa, ensuring Kenya’s commitment to protect their rights.
Committee rapporteurs and members intervention
Mr. Domah and Mr. Wang were the two special informers of the committee in charge
of analyzing and expressing their concerns about Kenya’s report.
Mr. Domah acknowledged and congratulated Kenya for the set of outstanding actions
taken by the government, which seemed to provide gender equality and ensure
human rights. However, he raised a great deal of enquiries concerning the actual state
of the country, that seemed to contradict the one displayed by the aforementioned
report. He considered the situation to include two distinct and opposite poles. One
marked by the government’s efforts, and the other marked by the government’s
failure to actually put those laws in practice.
Mr. Wang shared Mr. Domah’s opinion and also stated that even though Kenya’s work
and commitment to correct the situation had been notable, the situation had not
improved for their people, as he had noticed diverse cases of torture that had not
been prosecuted by the government.
Both Mr. Domah and Mr. Wang quoted a great number of cases and asked to know
why they had occurred and what measures had been taken against them, if any had
been taken at all. Thus, once their turn to speak was over, the other seven members of
the committee and also the chairman, Mr. Grossman insisted on informing the
delegation of Kenya about their concerns regarding the facts they had been informed
of, which portrayed a worrying picture of Kenya as a country where the human rights
were not respected. Altogether, the major issues brought up were:
 The police’s abuse of power, which unreasonably convicted, tortured and even
killed Kenyan citizens, and their passivity towards witnessing other acts of
violence e.g. the murder of a Somali journalist, and the incineration of people
in the streets. Therefore, a lack of faith in this institution was clear within the
Kenyan citizens, who had been indiscriminately arrested with no further
explanation, as well as being denied the right to bail. This said right was only
granted after confession, which was sometimes obtained through methods of
torture.

3.  The poor conditions of Kenya’s prisons, where the number of convicts often
doubled the maximum capacity, with prisoners held for three or four years
until their trials. Thus, this situation also created a problem of health, as they
had no method of controlling HIV.
 The corruption of the legal system, which did not prosecute any of the
aforementioned offences. Mostly because many of the bills of rights integrated
in the Constitution had not been turned into Acts, thus they were mere façade.
 The inequality and deprivation of rights existing in Kenya. There were still cases
of female genital mutilation. Reports of women being held in hospitals in
subhuman conditions after giving birth had also been noted. Likewise,
children’s rights were constantly violated.
 The expulsion of some refugees to countries that have not agreed to respect
the Convention against torture, and the deportation of prisoners to said
countries as well.
Encouraging the delegation of Kenya to continue working toward equality and
against torture, Mr. Grossman concluded the morning’s session, which was to be
resumed the morning after, where the committee will hear the delegation of
Kenya’s answers to the questions posed during the meeting.