Kenyan anti-terror laws suspended by court on human rights concerns

The judge ruled that eight clauses of Kenya's new anti-terror laws, signed by President Kenyatta to combat the Islamic group al-Shabaab, must be examined by the courts to ensure their compatibility with personal liberties.

Khalil Senosi/AP/File
People leave a mortuary last month after viewing the bodies of those killed in a December attack by Islamic militant group al-Shabaab in northern Kenya. The attack, which left 36 dead, prompted President Uhuru Kenyatta to shake up his national security team amid public outrage over the continuing violence.

Kenya's High Court on Friday suspended some of the anti-terrorism measures signed into law two weeks ago by President Uhuru Kenyatta, saying objections raised by the opposition over the laws' constitutionality should be settled by the judiciary.

Mr. Kenyatta said when he signed the law on Dec. 19 that it did not go against the bill of rights or any provision of the constitution, but opposition groups have said the measures, which increased the time suspects can be held without charge to 360 days from 90 days, threaten liberties and free speech.

Kenyatta has faced mounting pressure to boost security since Somali al Shabaab rebels killed 67 people in a Nairobi shopping mall in September 2013 and after frequent attacks in 2014. Last month he replaced the interior minister and the police chief.

Issuing his ruling on Friday, High Court Judge George Odunga also criticized the manner in which the law was passed in parliament: opposition legislators threw books at the Speaker, shouted, chanted and sprinkled water over his deputy.

"I grant conservatory orders suspending the following clauses ... pending the hearing and determination of these petitions," Odunga said in his ruling, suspending eight clauses.

The ruling was greeted with cheers and jubilation in the Nairobi courtroom by members of Kenya's opposition coalition, which had filed the legal challenge, and its leader Raila Odinga. They punched the air, chanting "a people united shall never be defeated!"

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.