Then the nightmare started — people began insulting and then assaulting them, and then they had to run away to Kenya. The couple have been in Nairobi since May of last year.

Like other lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people, they came to this urban jungle seeking anonymity, explained the official running a programme that looks after these refugees.

His organisation, which last year alone looked after 67 LGBT cases in Kenya, did not want to be named for fear of endangering its refugees.

Some have fled a strict application of Islamic law in Somalia, others are running from general sexual violence in the Democratic Republic of Congo and yet others have fled a climate of growing hostility elsewhere in east Africa.

Some hope to be able to find refuge in Western countries sympathetic to their plight, such as the United States.

In December, President Barack Obama said that fighting discrimination against gays should be at the forefront of American diplomacy.

And last month UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon told African leaders they must respect gay rights, in an unusually outspoken statement at the African Union summit.

“One form of discrimination ignored or even sanctioned by many states for too long has been discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity,” he said at the meeting in Addis Ababa.

In Kampala, people “did not know we [gays] existed” until a member of parliament in 2009 proposed strengthening the law against homosexuality, which could already lead to a life sentence in prison.

“People demonstrated against us, told us we were not human beings. We could not buy from shopkeepers,” recounted John, 26.

But worse was to come.

A screaming tabloid headline encouraged its readers to “hang” homosexuals and in October 2010 published the names, photos and addresses of more than 20 gays, including those of the couple.

“People started disappearing,” said John, who was beaten up several times.

Then Paul was attacked.

“I was watching a film when I heard a lot of noise,” said the well-built 24-year-old. “People had broken into my place, armed with stones, sticks and machetes.”

John, who was on his way to his boyfriend’s home, fled when he saw the attackers.

– ‘Their lives are in danger’ –

“To me he was dead,” he remembers thinking of his partner.

Paul owes his life to the intervention of the police, who however immediately jailed him. “I was physically abused, beaten, bleeding from everywhere,” he recounted with difficulty.

His friend David Kato, a gay activist, intervened to get him freed.

Paul, whose home had been trashed and who no longer dared set foot in his three electronics shops, kept on hoping the situation would improve.

That is until Kato was brutally murdered just over a year ago, found bludgeoned to death at home outside Kampala on January 26, 2011.

The killing sparked widespread international condemnation, including from Obama who decried such crimes as “unconscionable” and said: “LGBT rights are not special rights; they are human rights.”

After Kato’s murder, Paul decided to join John who had gone into hiding in Busia, near the Kenyan border.

Their fellow Ugandan Danie, 31, avoided getting beaten up before her arrest because she never revealed she was transgender.

She was a civil servant in a prominent Ugandan institution. She also served, clandestinely, as point of contact for American and Canadian LGBT rights groups.

When her secret sideline was found out she was jailed for five weeks.

“They questioned me. ‘What are your very ultimate objectives?’ (they asked). I was accused of being an enemy to the government,” she told AFP.

She was freed when a powerful uncle intervened and she fled to Kenya at the end of July 2011.

When she talks to people back in Kampala they tell her that Ugandan intelligence operatives have been trying to track her down in Nairobi.

LGBT refugees are in a particularly difficult position, said the official from the programme that helps them.

They cannot return home where their lives are in danger. Nor can they settle in Kenya, where refugees are not allowed to work and where homosexuality is also illegal.

The only solution is often to head to a third country.

His NGO has over the past several years tried to make humanitarian organisations aware of the extent of the problem.

“It’s a very slow process, people are very reluctant to take care of LBGT refugees as such. They feel other priorities are more important.”

By Seth Engel

Diplomats, scholars and lawyers from around the world united to create the International Criminal Court (ICC) in 1998 after decades of dogged effort to bring war criminals to justice, combat impunity for dictators, and provide a small measure of relief to victims of torture, forced deportation, rape, and genocide.

That’s why the ICC is investigating the states with the very worst human rights records. Seriously, go ahead, name a country. Iran? Ehh, other than a few extrajudicial executions and debasement of women, not too much is going on over there. Syria, you say? C’mon, what’s a massacre between friends (and let’s not forget Russia’s heavy arms support of Assad)?

No, you’ve got it all wrong. The biggest human rights violator, the state on which the ICC should be focusing all of its prosecutorial power and judicial resources, is Kenya. That’s right, Kenya — a place where a major national concern is the credit rate of the central bank.

Surprised? Join the club. According to three professors who rank among the top thinkers on international criminal law actually alive today, you aren’t alone. Here are the two major concerns as relayed by the “big three”: Profs. William Schabas of Middlesex University in London, Jens David Ohlin of Cornell Law School, and Kevin Jon Heller of Melbourne Law School.

1. Get your $#!^ together, Prosecutor.

Alright, that’s not as much of a concern as an order. Most of you may know that the ICC recently released two out of six suspects for crimes against humanity allegedly committed in Kenya. This occurred at the “confirmation of charges” stage, a process that is unique to the ICC and requires the Prosecutor to show “substantial grounds” that the suspects are guilty. If he does so, the case goes to trial. If he doesn’t, the suspect is released.

Professor Schabas hails from Toronto and is currently one of the most cited and respected authors in international criminal law. According to him, four out of six isn’t good enough. In fact, the Prosecutor has only confirmed 10 out of 14 cases, including the recent release of Mbarushimana and Abu Garda of Sudan. This rounds out the Prosecutor’s success rate at a whopping 71%. That score is bad news for anyone not trying to pass the NY Bar Exam. By way of comparison, Prof. Schabas reckons that the prosecutors at the UN tribunals set up after the war in the former Yugoslavia had a conviction rate of 86%. Keep in mind we’re talking convictions — proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Confirmation charges require only “substantial grounds” to believe that the person committed the crimes charged.

“What’s so bad about a 71% conviction rate?” you might ask. After all, US Department of Justice statistics show that only 67% of murder suspects are convicted in state court. First of all, murder convictions again require “beyond a reasonable doubt.” Secondly, the Prosecutor is meant to try those most responsible for the most serious of crimes. Professor Heller agrees that the indictment had included relatively “minor players.” The Prosecutor is meant to be following his mandate and the mandate of the court by avoiding the low-hanging fruit and seeking the arrest of those who enjoy the most impunity — that means agitation for Security Council inquiries into potential crimes in countries like Syria and Myanmar. Anything else, as Prof. Schabas puts it, is a waste of judicial resources, a source of false hope to the victims, and an injustice to the accused, who can languish in the Hague’s prison for as long as five years.

2. Organization? What organization?

The Prosecutor had to show the existence of an “organization” twice in the Kenya case, once to show that a “state or organizational policy” was responsible for the crimes against humanity (as required by Article 7(2)(a) of the Rome Statute) and again to show that the defendants were “indirect co-perpetrators” with “exclusive control” over a state-like apparatus.

As Professor Ohlin discusses, there are at least two bases for questioning the Prosecutor’s characterization of the alleged organizations. First, it’s questionable whether or not the so-called Network of the Ruto case (a.k.a. Kenya II) or the ethnic elements of the Mungiki tribe in the Muthaura (a.k.a. Kenya I) constitute an organization. In fact German Judge Hans-Peter Kaul dissented from the confirmation decision, taking issue with this exact claim. Professor Heller stated in an email that he would have voted with Judge Kaul if he was on the Pre-Trial Chamber, concurring that “the majority overly diluted the policy requirement.”

The Prosecutor had to show a form of organization a second time due to his form of charging in which the suspects where considered “indirect co-perpetrators.” This form of liability was created in Article 25 of the Rome Statute and extrapolated by the judges in order to capture the leaders of a criminal organization and prevent their escaping liability simply by being the organizers and commanders (a subject I treat here in the context of US war crimes).

Grouping loosely affiliated people into a Network in Kenya II and diverse tribal elements in Kenya I does indeed seem to dilute the “organizational policy” requirement, potentially expanding the Court’s jurisdiction over crimes against humanity and “machine-like apparatuses” to groups such as the mob, the Crips, and the London rioters.

Concluding Remarks

It’s easy to say charges and investigations at the ICC are political — that they are undertaken against those without a big veto-holding backer in the UN Security Council. That that’s why the Syria-Russia and Myanmar-China alliances are bigger obstacles to ending impunity than Kenya ever was. It’s easy to say that the Court is Afro-centered for the same reason. But for now let’s avoid the low-hanging fruit.

Professor Schabas concludes that the judges of the ICC are doing their job by “weeding out” loser cases brought by the Prosecutor. Let’s hope that the next cases brought are winners with real “organizational policies” committing the most serious of crimes.

Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sethengel/investigating-kenya-whats_b_1249378.html

NAIROBI, Kenya Feb 3 – The City Council of Nairobi is considering relaxing its by-laws to allow commercial sex workers work freely in the Kenyan capital.

Nairobi Mayor George Aladwa said on Friday that the council was working to harmonise by-laws with provisions of the new Constitution before allowing commercial sex workers to operate without restraint.

“We want to look at what the Constitution says about commercial sex work in the country. We will also look at the by-laws so that we help the commercial sex workers,” Aladwa said.

He said the council will stop harassing commercial sex workers once the laws are harmonised.

“We will certainly find places to have them operate freely without any harassment. These are people who have dedicated themselves to do their work, there is no need to continue harassing them,” he said, adding they will be required to pay relevant taxes.

Commercial sex work is currently illegal in Kenya and those found practicing it on the streets are often harassed and arrested.

Curiously, only women are arrested whenever they are found plying the age-old trade. Their male clients are seldom arrested.

In Nairobi, police and council officers often conduct swoops on the streets where they arrest female commercial sex workers.

When presented to court, the women are often charged with loitering.

Last week, 26 women were arrested for the offence in Parklands and Westlands.

SOURCE: http://www.capitalfm.co.ke/news/2012/02/nairobi-plans-to-legalise-prostitution/

Photo/FILE IIEC clerks in Eldoret North constituency on April 27, 2010. Eldoret North was one of the 18 constituencies where a pilot electronic voting registration exercise was held.

A team has been set up to determine how Kenyans living abroad will vote in the coming General Election.

The decision to form the taskforce arose at a meeting involving more than nine ministries and government agencies on Wednesday. The meeting was chaired by Justice minister Mutula Kilonzo.

The team is made up of representatives from the Justice,  Finance and Immigration ministries, and the Offices of the President and Prime Minister.

Other agencies represented in the taskforce are the Commission for the Implementation of the Constitution, Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission, Gender and Equality Commission, Kenya National Human Rights Commission and the Commission for the Administration of Justice.

The Office of the Attorney-General and organisations representing  Kenyans abroad will also be part of the team.

Kenyans abroad, under the banner of Diaspora Voting Action Committee (DVAC), want the government to ensure that there will be an electronic voting system for them before the end of this month.

“We demand the selection of the electronic voting provider be overseen and decided upon by a joint committee comprising DVAC, acting in liaison with the Diaspora Voting Advisory Councils in various countries and the Kenyan Government,” they said.

Source: http://www.nation.co.ke/News/politics/Team+set+up+to+decide+how+Kenyans+abroad+will+vote+/-/1064/1318808/-/u3panlz/-/

A row is brewing again over religious attire in schools. Last night one student had to stage a sit in at the Ministry of Education for her to get admission after the school rejected her Akorino turban. The incident comes in the wake of a case filed by a Muslim girl seeking to compel her school, Kenya High School, to allow her to wear her headdress known as the Hijab. Sheila Sendeyo now reports on a controversy to which not even the Ministry of Education has a solution.

VICE-PRESIDENT Kalonzo Musyoka would be the big winner if Uhuru Kenyatta and William Ruto were forced to pull out of the presidential race this year. A new survey by polling company Strategic Research indicates that Kalonzo would get around 20.9 per cent of the vote compared to Prime Minister Raila Odinga’s 36.5 per cent. However the poll interestingly indicates most Kenyans believe that Uhuru and Ruto should be allowed to contest the presidency, with 61 per cent saying they should be allowed to stand and 39 per cent saying no.

The Strategic Research poll interviewed 2433 randomly selected people across Kenya between January 27 and 30 on behalf of the Star and Radio Africa group. It is the first opinion poll to be conducted since charges were confirmed against Deputy PM Uhuru, Eldoret North MP Ruto, former Civil Service boss Francis Muthaura and radio presenter Joshua Sang on January 23.

There had been expectations of a sympathy vote for Uhuru and Ruto after the ICC charges were confirmed but it is not apparent in the poll as the ratings are similar to last year’s surveys. If they were all standing, 36.9 per cent said they would vote for Raila; 23.9 per cent for Uhuru; 10.6 per cent for Ruto; 9.7 per cent for Kalonzo; 4.6 per cent for Martha Karua; 2.6 per cent for Peter Kenneth; 2.1 per cent for George Saitoti; 1.8 per cent for Eugene Wamalwa; 1.8 per cent for Musalia Mudavadi; and 1.2 per cent for Raphael Tuju.

Kalonzo would make the biggest jump if Uhuru and Ruto are disqualified from running for president by the ICC charges. Raila’s share would hardly change at 36.5 per cent but Kalonzo would jump to 20.9 per cent with Martha Karua third on 8.1 per cent; George Saitoti on 8 per cent; Eugene Wamalwa on 5.2 per cent, Raphael Tuju on 2.7 per cent; and Musalia Mudavadi on 2.5 per cent.

At the moment therefore the most likely outcome will be a second round run-off in the presidential poll with Raila facing either Uhuru or Kalonzo. If Central fronts a single candidate candidate, the clear front runner would be Martha Karua. She was the preferred candidate of 46.5 per cent of respondents with Peter Kenneth second on 37 per cent. Other Central politicians were far behind: John Michuki was preferred by 1.8 per cent; George Saitoti by 1 per cent; Kiraitu Murungi by 1 per cent; and Amos Kimunya with 0.7 per cent.

But among Central Province and Nairobi respondents, Peter Kenneth led Martha Karua by 53.1 per cent to 37.9 per cent, and 41.7 per cent to to 36.7 per cent respectively. Some Central hardliners have been advocating for a constitutional amendment to allow President Kibaki to run for a third term. But ut would do them little good.

If Kibaki was running again, according to the poll, Raila would get 38.6 per cent of the vote; Kibaki 17 per cent; Uhuru 15.5 per cent; Kalonzo 7.1 per cent; Karua 5.6 per cent: Ruto 5.5 per cent; Kenneth 2.5 per cent; Mudavadi 2 per cent;  Saitoti 1.9 per cent; and Wamalwa 1.5 per cent. And in a final unexpected twist, 58.7 per cent of respondents said Uhuru should retain his position as Deputy PM with only 33.9 per cent saying he should resign. The poll indicated that support for politicians varied little among age groups.

However there were big regional shifts with Uhuru supported by 77.8 per cent of Central; Raila by 72.3 per cent of Nyanza; Kalonzo by 41.4 per cent of Eastern; and Ruto by 30.1 per cent of Rift. Raila’s overall strength appeared to come from his national support with a lead of 41.7 per cent in Nairobi; 42 per cent in Coast; 51.7 per cent in North East; and 62 per cent in Western.

In 1999 Strategic Research we conducted the first political opinion poll in Kenya and has since undertaken more than 100 opinion polls on topical issues. Its clients have included the American government, the International Republican Institute, UNIFEM, Community Aid and many other institutional clients. The poll of 2,433 respondents was conducted with a representative demographic spread across all regions of Kenya.

Source: http://www.the-star.co.ke/national/national/60615-61-want-ruto-uhuru-to-stand

The Constitutional Court has issued orders stopping all public debate on whether deputy Prime Minister Uhuru Kenyatta and Eldoret North MP William Ruto can vie for presidency following confirmation of charges facing them at the International Criminal Court (ICC).

Justice Isack Lenaola on Thursday issued the orders after three voters Mr Patrick Njuguna, Mr Augustino Netto, Mr Charles Omanga and two civil society organisations; Kenya Youth Parliament and Kenya Youth League moved to court seeking orders to bar the candidates from contesting for presidency.

” In view of the fact that this court is now seized of the question whether Uhuru and Ruto are qualified or not to run for presidency, the court is now sub judice and all persons and authorities enjoined should not discuss the matter in public failure to which the court may take such action against them”, ruled Justice Lenaola.

In a suit filed at the High Court in Nairobi, the petitioners had argued that allowing Uhuru and Ruto to run for public office would be a recipe for chaos.

Through their advocate, Mr Anthony Oluoch, they further claimed that allowing Uhuru and Ruto to run for presidency would amount to perpetuating a culture of impunity. The petitioners are also seeking orders to bar Independent Electoral Boundaries Commission (IEBC) from accepting nomination or election of any candidate accused of committing serious offences under the International law or Kenyan law until they are cleared.

The petitioners also argue that the candidature of Uhuru and Ruto is a threat to the Constitution.

They want the court to determine whether the decision by the two to vie for presidency, despite confirmation of charges against them in The Hague-based court, would be a threat to the Constitution.

Further, they want the court to determine whether presumption of innocence in favour of the two persons overrides the overwhelming public interest to ensure protection and upholding the principles of the Constitution.

The petitioners also want the court to declare that presumption of innocence of the two does not override public interest.

The petition came after the ICC pre-trial judges confirmed charges against Uhuru, Ruto and former Head of Civil Service Francis Muthaura and radio journalist Joshua Arap Sang.

Source: http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/InsidePage.php?id=2000051309&cid=4

Men who have sex with men may now be at considerably higher risk of acquiring HIV than other at-risk groups such as female sex workers or young people of either sex, if findings by the International AIDS Vaccine Initiative (IAVI) of HIV incidence at two centres in Kenya can be generalised to other populations.

The study, which compared the Kenyan populations with a largely heterosexual group from South  Africa, also found lower-than-expected HIV incidence amongst female sex workers and their clients. The researchers also found that recruiting MSM into the study was easier than expected, but note that there was a particularly high dropout rate in MSM.

They comment that while MSM “need urgent risk reduction interventions, and may be a suitable cohort for future HIV prevention studies,”because African MSM face considerably legal and social hurdles in coming forward,“careful consideration of the counselling and clinical needs, follow-up schedule and social support is vital to ensure continuing research participation.”