Skip to main content

Constitution Must Treat All Religions Equally

A Commentary by Pete Ondeng and Peter Waiyaki

The public discourse on whether or not the Kadhi Courts should be included in the constitution has been wrongly interpreted by many to be a Christian vs Muslim affair. The often uninformed rhetoric by hard liners on both sides of the argument adds an unnecessary and potentially explosive element to the already charged political atmosphere.

The issue here is not about religion, but about the constitution. The move to change the current constitution springs from an acknowledgement by most people that there are wrongs in the document that need to be made right. There are some basic rights, for instance, that the original constitution did not address, and which need to be enshrined in the new document. Similarly, there were some provisions that were included by those who negotiated the Lancaster House document that no longer hold water and need to be scrapped.

The Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) retreat in Naivasha, which was expected by many to degenerate into an ODM vs PNU muscle-flexing contest, pleasantly surprised the nation by reaching consensus on almost all of the so-called contentious issues.

In regard to the Kadhi Courts, however, the PSC missed the point and actually went astray. Curiously, the draft constitution that emerged from that retreat omitted a simple but critical phrase that had appeared in all the many draft constitutions that have been produced since the first one in 2002. All previous versions of the Draft Constitution have consistently stated categorically that “State and religion will be separate, there will be no state religion and that all religions will be treated equally. These provisions have now been removed, leaving only that There Will Be No State Religion. Most people are not aware that this small but significant change was made in Naivasha.

Why was this phrase removed, and what would be the significance of its absence in the constitution? The only logical conclusion would be that the new constitution does not acknowledge all religions as equal.

The Constitution enunciates equality for all citizens. Further it provides that nobody shall be discriminated against by reason of their religion, among other things. Unfortunately, the Kadhi courts are themselves an institutionalization of inequality. They seek to favour one religion over others by creating and protecting and providing for state funding of a purely religious system of dispute resolution.

One of the central arguments from those who advocate for Kadhi courts to be included in the constitution is that the courts have been in the constitution since independence. This is very true. The courts did not accidentally end up in the constitution but were a part of the negotiations between Jomo Kenyatta and the Sultan of Zanzibar which led to the 10 mile coastal strip being incorporated into the Republic of Kenya at independence. However, these historical reasons and context no longer apply. What was then a concession to a small part of the country and a very small part of the population has now become a demand and a right applicable to the whole country.

Excluding the Kadhi courts from the new constitution would not in any way hinder the rights of Muslims to worship Allah or to establish courts and other mechanism of dispute resolution. The role of the Kadhi as a religious office will remain intact, organized and funded by the Muslim community, in the same way as other religions will be required to fund their own activities.

The only effect of not including the courts in the constitution would be that, like for all other religions, there would be no funding using tax payers money, and the offices for Kadhis would be recognized rightly as religious offices, and not government office. Most importantly, the draft constitution that will soon be presented to Kenyans for a referendum must include the important clause removed by the PSC: that all religions will be treated equally.

Pete Ondeng is a development economist & author of Africa’s Moment; Peter Waiyaki is an advocate of the High Court of Kenya


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Secret vs The Bible

Or should I put the, The Bible versus The Secret. Of late a couple of my friends have asked me a lot about 'The Secret' which is supposed to be revolutionizing people's lives. I got a chance to watch the DVD on TS but somehow I was not convinced. Don't get me wrong, a lot of what they teach is great and people should be applying it. But I do have a couple of issues with it. One thing that really bothered me is the way they sort of overlooked God or glossed over him. They even do quote scripture and all but still, it wasn't convincing. They have Biblical principals and even teach that many preachers e.g Kenneth Copeland, Creflo Dollar, Joel Osteen and so on teach principles based on the secret. Well, I think they are just trying to justify their teaching. I for one listen to all these preachers regularly. I am subscribed to their podcasts, buy their books and CDs and DVDs. Never once did I hear them use the secret as their reference material. They use the Bible - God...

Comprehensive Analysis of Private Pension Scheme Providers in Kenya (2024-2025)

  This report provides a detailed overview and comparative analysis of leading private pension scheme providers in Kenya, focusing on their costs, value propositions, guaranteed minimum interest rates, and overall performance. The analysis aims to inform individuals seeking to invest approximately KES 10,000 per month for their retirement planning. Overview of Key Providers The Kenyan private pension landscape features several prominent providers, each offering distinct advantages. Based on recent performance and product offerings for 2024-2025, the following schemes are notable: Provider 2024 Declared Return Guaranteed Minimum Rate Management/Admin Costs Key Value Proposition Zimele 15.0% Market-linked / Guaranteed Fund 2.5% p.a. management fee; No entry/exit fees . Offers a low entry barrier (KES 100), high flexibility in contributions, and has consistently delivered competitive returns . Sanlam Kenya 15.0% 5.0% (typically) Competitive (approximately 2% p.a.) Demonstrated strong ...

Huawei IDEOS U8150 Review

I am a self-confessed Nokia die-hard. I have stuck with them even though the performance of some of their later models of phones, especially the touchscreen ones has been less than stellar. Nokia make great hardware. I am yet to find a manufacturer that makes sturdy long lasting phones Like Nokia does. However, their software seems to leave a lot to be desired. Saying that, I still do believe that the Nokia E71 is one of the best smartphones they may. I still have mine to date and it has served me faithfully. A friend who couldn’t understand my almost fanatical obsession with Nokia phones dared me to try another smartphone operating system. Try the iPhone or an Android phone and then tell me if you will go back to Nokia. The opportunity came when Safaricom introduced the uber-cheap Huawei IDEOS U8150 in Kenya. Retailing at 8,500 Kenya Shillings with 600MB free data and 1,000 Shillings free airtime, it was a bargain to say the least. The IDEOS had Android 2.2 (Froyo) installed. It com...