KENYA: MUSLIMS POSITION ON THE PROPOSED DRAFT CONSTITUTION

from abu Ayman

The statement from Muslim leaders was read by the National Muslim Leaders Forum (NAMLEF) chairman Abdullahi Abdi and the Supreme Council of Kenya Muslims secretary general Adan Wachu. Also present was the deputy speaker Farah Maalim, Muslim MPs and heads of several Muslim organisations.

Thanks

PRESS STATEMENT:
MUSLIMS POSITION ON THE PROPOSED DRAFT CONSTITUTION
SATURDAY 10th APRIL, 2010

For the last one week the Muslims leaders in Kenya have been consulting widely with the Muslims communities and other non Muslims in the whole country and closely followed the debate on issues especially the concerns of representation, land ownership holding, the Kadhi’s court and the bills of rights in the proposed constitution.

The Muslim leaders wish to state the following;

1. As the constitution making process is hitting the final stage, we wish to give confidence to Kenyans to embrace spirit of tolerance, and mature dialogue. We should all avoid temptation of being divisive at all times in our speech, messages and activities that undermine our cohesiveness and ignore our national diversity.

2. We appreciate that constitution making is not a winner take it all process but rather it is a process guided by comprise of several interests in the country, there is no group, sector, religion or region that can get all what it wants, we are well aware that at no time will man made constitution satisfy every single individual or community at once at all times.

3. As we carry on the debate on the intrinsic worth or limitation of the draft constitution, we wish to express deep solidarity and appreciation for those patriotic Kenyans who gave their lives, time and put in hard labor for us all to be where we are today. We further call upon all Muslims and other Kenyans of good will to work hard and ensure that the proposed constitution succeeds. This can only be achieved when we register as voters.

4. We call upon all leaders from across divides to desist and tone down hard positions and embrace the wider picture of preserving our national unity, and support national cohesion that will build strong foundation for prosperous nation. We extend the hand of unity and care for all our non Muslims brothers and sisters and urge them to join us to bring together our country.

5. Muslim leaders want to set a new pace for healing our nation from its upsetting cruel past. Muslim are supporting and will vote Yes to ensure the proposed constitution of Kenya succeeds.

SIGNED BY MUSLIM LEADERS:

4 thoughts on “KENYA: MUSLIMS POSITION ON THE PROPOSED DRAFT CONSTITUTION

  1. Pingback: KENYA: MUSLIMS POSITION ON THE PROPOSED DRAFT CONSTITUTION at … | the world cares.com

  2. Mannix

    CHURCHES,CHURCHES,CHURCHES where were you when ur flocks killed each other & burned houses? You were nowhere to be seen. Now you are very active to mobilising & deviding Kenyans along religion lines. History of this country will judge harshly as they did in Rwanda when ur fellow men of cloth used to betrays Tutsi by handed them over to be raped & killed by extremist Hutu.

  3. Mansoor Nandlal

    Mannix

    Whoever the author of this article/column thinks only came from his point of view and the truth about the agreement. Anti reformer are only looking for loopholes to confuse and incites Kenyan voters to resist the new constitution and stick to the current one which is worsed than the one they are trying to reject. Kadhi’s court is unavoidable since it is there in the current constitution,unless churches have forgetting its mandate to reconcile its flock who always fight after every election and now they are going even further to incite and divide the country along religion line.If Church is now spreading lies and unfounded propaganda about constitution,how will i entrust my faith on them while they broke the 10 commandment of God which states; Thou shall not bear false witness. Church mandate is to give honest guide line and not using podium and pulpit to spread rumours, propaganda or preach hatred against other religions.What is wrong for our Muslims brothers bargaining their way to be recognised by the constitution where their christian counterpart assumed that since our constitution is originated from English common law which was 90% favors christian doctrine.Why all this noises if not hypocrisy. Vatican is well known for their political manipulation and interference in many countries to favour their interests which we all fear it could bring Apocalypse or Armageddon if we follow their dogmatic tactics which is to manipulate the world religious faith & doctrine. To be honest,why did they amends the great 10 commandment of God? This is Kenya constitution not church doctrine and should let Kenyans to decides without their interferences. Even the author of this article are clearly right by stating kadhi’s court is originated from sharia law because even the constitution is called sharia in Swahili. Kenyans please read first and follow your conscience don’t be sycophant.

    – – – – — – – – – – –

    David wrote:

    Comment:
    A Brief History of the Kadhi’s courts.

    reigned over the 1 0 mile coastal strip,

    whereby the British government purchased the 1 0 miles from the Sultan of Zanzibar for £ 200,000.

    The 1895 Agreement
    In 1895, the Great Britain entered into an agreement with the Sultan of Zanzibar, who controlled The agreement provided, interlay that the British government would not subject the inhabitants of coastal strip to the Christian laws of

    the British Colonial government. However, this agreement provided that the agreement was to terminate if Kenya ceased to be a British colony or should Britain give 6 months notice.

    The 1962/1963 Lancaster Constitutional Conference

    The 1962/1963 Lancaster Constitutional Conference through political intrigues erroneously entrenched the Kadhi’s court in the Kenyan

    constitution. During the 1962 Lancaster Conference, the issue of the Kenya protectorate along the Coast or what was otherwise known

    as the 1 0 miles coastal strip was dealt with but not comprehensively discussed, and the Kadhi’s court were hurriedly a improperly entrenched in the constitution. The Sultan of Zanzibar had a purported claim over the said strip which was inaccurate since the coastal strip was not his territory.

    During that time, the 10 miles coastal strip consisted of other nationalities other than Arab and, their claims did not extent to the interior.

    Constitutional Review Processes- Bomas and Wako Drafts
    The issue of religious courts was a contentious issue at Bomas. It was also a contentious issue in Wako draft because many religious leaders were opposed to the establishment/entrenchment of religious courts in the constitution.

    Current Situation;- Engaging the Committee of Experts
    The current situation is that the CoE of experts did not declare the issue of religious courts contentious and yet we know they have included Kadhis courts in the draft constitution that they are soon to present before the Kenyan voter.

    What is their position on the issue?
    Kenyans have been actively trying to engage the CoE despite the feeling that d Committee is not keen in listening to the voices of our members.

    Is there a plot to sideline a critical mass or a majority of Kenyans from airing their views?

    Separation of Church and State;

    The separation of religion and state is a trite constitutional principle founded on practicalities of constitution making. For instance, if there exists a state religion chances are that the state can easily infringe on the freedom of religion. This principle also involves the fact that the state should not treat one religion as superior to the other in Form of according unfair economic privileges to one religion over the others and in terms of acknowledging one religion over the others.

    a. Unfair economic privileges the current
    Kenyan constitution and the subsequent draft constitutions (Bomas Draft and Wako Draft) establishes the Kadhi’s court which legislates over matter concerning the personal law of Muslims. While this is not in contention because Muslims can enjoy this privilege; however, it is the taxpayers who have to maintain these courts. These taxpayers are forced to pay for the upkeep of Kadhi’s through public funds for a private function. The argument is that it accords an unfair advantage on those who profess the Muslim religion because the government is empowering those who do not need empowerment. Do Muslims need to be empowered when they are not a minority neither do they face discrimination? Public funds must not be used to empower a group that is already empowered

    b. Acknowledging one religion over the other; the current Kenyan constitution and the subsequent draft constitutions (Bomas Draft and Wako Draft) seem to acknowledge the Muslim religion over other religions by reason of the entrenchment of the Kadhi’s courts/ religious courts in the constitution

    The aforesaid instances in the current Kenyan Constitution, the Wako Draft and the Bomas Draft show a violation of the principle of separation of religion and state. Although Kenya is a multi-religious state, it still remains that one religion should not be exalted over the others.

    The result of doing otherwise would be religious tensions and violence.

    Religious tensions as a source of conflict

    The view of many Kenyans recorded by the Commission of Kenya on Constitutional Review (CKRC) in their report was that the Constitution
    (or government) must not do anything to help, encourage, set up, regulate, fund and protect one particular religion to establishment of its court.

    At Bomas (National Constitutional Conference at Bomas of Kenya) the issue of religious courts was regarded as a contentious issue.

    A lot of conflict ensued regarding the issue of Kadhi’s court being entrenched in the constitution during the constitutional review process at Bomas. This conflict was exemplified by;

    1.The burning of Churches

    2.The recent violent clobbering by the police of a peaceful procession by Church
    leaders and members in Mombasa to express dissatisfaction.

    To prevent future religious tensions, religious courts must not be entrenched in the constitution. In my view i hold that entrenching Kadhi’s court in the
    constitution will provide a recipe for future religious tensions, conflicts and violence because it will be viewed that the constitution is elevating one religion
    over the others.

    Sharia law as the source of law for the Kadhi’s court and a source of conflict of laws
    All laws have a source. The sources of Kenyan law are largely borrowed from the English common law and its legal system. Where do the Kadhi’s court originate?

    The Kadhi’s court has its source in Sharia law which is a recipe for conflict in law in the future. The question this country should be asking is whether it should have Sharia law entrenched its constitution? Does Kenya want to go the Sharia way?
    As a Kenyan I would propose that matters that would cause conflict in our laws should be kept away from the constitution. A constitution is a document that should steer clean of any religious conflict or rivalry. By putting Sharia law alongside our legal system, we are opening the Pandora’s Box to future religious animosity in this country.

    Matters of Muslim Personal law should be kept away from the constitution
    In matters of personal law do Kenyan Muslims need religious courts to enforce? Each religion in Kenya has a mechanism for dispute resolution.

    Christians for example have a “court system” whose mechanism is prescribed through the Bible. This does not mean that Christian courts have

    to be enacted. As Christians we do not need Christian Courts to legislate over our matters. Hindus, who are a minority in Kenya , have their own personal law as regards marriage, divorce, child custody and inheritance. They, however, do not need Hindu courts to legislate over these matters. Why do Muslims need
    Kadhi’s court to legislate in matters of personal law? Is the Muslim religion superior to the Hindu and Christian religion? Why should the constitution treat one religion more favorably than the other religions.

    Some people have argued that our current laws are “Christian” and therefore inconsistent with Muslim way of life. The argument has been that Islam is a way of life

    and therefore to appear before “Christian” courts to be judged by “Christian” judges is unacceptable and contrary to their religious teachings. This argument is fallacious because if you take a close look at our legal system it is considered to be a secular institution as opposed to “Christian”. According to Christian doctrines taking a matter before the current justice system is against God’s will. Most Christians consider the legal system as “worldly’ and “secular.” It would be absurd to call our present legal system as “Christian” because even Muslim and Hindu judges sit on the bench, neither is it a requirement that one to be a “Christian” for one to be under its jurisdiction, if it were a “Christian” court the first question that parties to a suit would be asked would be whether they believe in Christ Jesus or riot. Usually and practically this is not the case.

    As a result, our current laws and judicial system is NOT Christian.

    Comparative study of constitutions worldwide

    A Comparative study of constitutions world wide in the context of religious courts shows that most stable democratic nations such as the United States and European countries do not have Kadhi’s court entrenched in their constitution. Even South Africa , whose constitution is widely hailed because of the struggles against the apartheid government, does not have Religious/Kadhi’s court.

    Frequently Asked Questions

    Q. Some people in Kenya have argued that the Muslims have long enjoyed
    the right to have the Kadhi’s court entrenched in the constitution, why should it be taken away from them now?

    A. Contrary to what some people have held, the right to have a Religious/Kadhi’s court is not a right. There is no international instrument in which Kenya is a party to that recognizes such a right nor does it exists in most if not all international instruments. There are only three types of rights recognized internationally; civil and political rights, economic, cultural and social rights and third generation rights; none of which mention a right to have a Kadhi’s court.

    No international or regional instrument (International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)J, International Covenant on Social, Economic and Cultural Rights (ICSECR) and the African Charter) sets out the right to have a Kadhi’s court as a right neither is it categorized as one of the group of rights defined above.

    So which is this right that is be ascertained?

    Perhaps it is the right to freedom of religion which we recognize as a right and is recognized internationally.

    Q. What harm is there to Christians or to Hindus? Kadhi’s court only legislate on
    matters of Islamic personal law, it will not harm any Christian?
    What is the fuss all about? You Christians are being unreasonable.

    A. The entrenchment of the Kadhi’s court in the constitution is harm to not only Christians but to everyone in Kenya . The reasons are very simple;

    a. All laws must be neutral if they are not neutral then they are biased. A simple analogy is when in a family setup a parent treats one Sibling better than the others (Joseph story); it is a recipe for (future or apparent) conflict. This also applies in religious matters. If a state is really honest about treating all religions equally;
    if a state is committed to ensure that one religion is not treated more favorably than another, then it must ensure that its mother document- the constitution-
    does not create a situation where one religion perceives as being treated less favorably then the other.
    b. Neutral laws do not prevent religious diversity; in many countries with large Muslim populations, Kadhi’s court is not provided for in their constitution and yet
    Muslims enjoy their freedom of religion.

    Are Christians (and other religions in Kenya being unreasonable by demanding that our laws be neutral and free from religious bias? Is it unreasonable to demand that Kenyan law does not treat people who ascribe to a certain belief more favorable than others?

    The argument of the majority of Kenyans has been that our constitution must always and at all times be neutral especially on religious matters. It must create a level play ground where all religions —Christianity, Islam, Buddhist, Hindus and others- can enjoy and uphold their religious freedom. It must not guarantee a position where a certain religion is empowered more than the others unless there is a reason to do so i.e. the religious group is a minority. But in Kenya today Muslims and Christians are not a minority. Facts are unclear as to whether Hindu’s consider themselves as a minority but Muslims in Kenya ARE NOT a minority.

    If Muslims in Kenya are a minority then there should be some “sunset clauses.” These sunset clauses ensure that a minority group is not “over-empowered”
    over the other groups. in other words, if Muslims are truly a minority group, then those sunset clauses will set a time limit within which empowerment is no longer
    necessary.

    Q. Why now? You did not oppose it at Bomas, what has changed?

    A. Constitutions are made to remedy past injustice and past mistakes. The history of the Kadhi’s court shows that it was a mistake for the Kadhi’s court to be entrenched in the current constitution. Our study reveals that political intrigues and expediency may have played a large role in bringing about this situation.

    Even at Bomas this opinion was raised but it seemed as though there was a plot to silence this voice. One of the reasons why the Wako Draft was rejected
    was because it established and entrenched the Kadhi’s court.
    Constitutions are also made to ensure that the generations to come enjoy peace, unity and harmony. The issue of the Religious/ Kadhi’s court has been a source
    of conflict since the beginning of tile constitutional review process. Religious leaders have come out strongly to oppose the entrenchment of the Kadhi’s court in the constitution.

    In summary, nothing has changed because there was never a time when the Kadhi’s court was not an issue in this country. It did not start today and it will not end

    until the issue is resolved. Kenyans must make a constitution that can remedy past injustices and past mistakes. We must make a constitution that fosters peace, love and unity.

    Q. Are you being biased because you are Christians and yet you do not understand the Muslim religion?
    A. Islam is a way of life that much we understand from reading the Koran; however, they do not need a Kadhi’s court to be entrenched in our constitution for them

    to practice their religion. Christianity is also a way of life and the Bible teaches us that we should not resolve our conflicts before unbelievers. We do not need a

    Christian court to resolve conflicts in matters of personal law.
    What many people do not understand is why over 20 million Kenyans should be forced to pay taxes in order support and sustain a system to a faith which millions of

    Kenyans do not ascribe to. We do not understand why a religion would need to be entrenched in the constitution for their adherents to follow their doctrines and
    precepts.
    To demand equal treatment is not being biased. To demand that our laws and our judicial system to remain separate from religious beliefs and customs is not being unreasonable; to demand that a new constitution foster unity, peace and harmony is to realize that a constitution is made for the good of the country and for the Kenyan in general whether Christian or not.

    Q. Are we a secular State?
    A. No. Kenya is not a secular state. It is a multi-religious state. In such a state, it would be disastrous to treat one religion more favorably than another.

    Q. Is it not better to entrench the Kadhi’s court in the constitution so that we can check the growth and power of the Islamic religion?

    if we leave the Muslim religion unchecked, it will grow dangerous….

    A. That is not a valid constitutional or legal argument. It goes against the spirit and purpose of the theories of constitution making or constitutional review. It has no sound legal or moral basis. It seems malicious and intended to portray the Islamic religion as physically dangerous. The Church does not hold this view. However, we believe in Jesus Christ as the ONLY way, the truth and the light. Salvation, we hold, is through Christ Jesus the Son of God.

    In the Lord’s service
    Injili Timilifu Mombasa Gospel Team

    See all comments on this post here:
    http://blog.jaluo.com/?p=4752#comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *