Kenya’s truth commission, a dead letter?

25 June 2014 by Abdullahi Boru, Nairobi (Kenya)

One year after its publication in May 2013, Kenya’s Truth, Justice and Reconciliation Commission (TJRC) recommendations remain dead letters. A combination of leadership struggles, political inertia and procedural issues has led many Kenyans to view the commission’s extensive report as yet another exercise in avoidance, designed to lower the political temperature. 

Since independence in 1963, Kenya has witnessed gross repressions of dissent and theft of public funds. Both the Kenyatta (1963-1978) and Moi (1978-2002) administrations oversaw violations. After being in power since independence, the Kenya African National Union (KANU) lost the 2002 elections, to a coalition of opposition parties the National Rainbow Coalition (NARC). The new administration decided to form a commission to inquire into historical injustices, massive or systemic human rights violations, economic crimes and the irregular acquisition of land by the previous party.

On 17 April 2003, the government appointed a Task Force on the establishment of a Truth, Justice, and Reconciliation Commission. Victims, their families, the political elite and the human rights community, all welcomed its formation. Many hoped it could provide real answers and that perpetrators of killings and disappearances would speak the truth or ask for pardon. This gold standard, set by the South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission, was always going to be difficult to achieve.

Want to read more?

If you subscribe to a free membership, you can read this article and explore our full archive, dating back to 1997.

Subscribe now

Related articles

19 February 2007 by Laetitia Grotti

One year ago on January 6, 2006, the 17 members of Morocco's Equity and Reconciliation Commission (IER) were closing up shop after submitting their final report to King Mohammed VI. The Moroccan truth commission had received a flood of compliments from the international community praising the recommendations in its report, especially those advocating legislative and constitutional reforms. One year later, however, the results have been rather mixed.

11 September 2006 by our correspondent in Arusha

After having tried high-ranking officers, ministers, businessmen, priests, journalists, local officials and militiamen, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) is in uncharted waters. On September 11, the most famous rwandese troubadour of his generation will stand trial for genocide. 

23 October 2006 by Christine Chaumeau

China is keeping a polite distance from international criminal justice. Beijing is hardly disinterested, but China does want to make sure that these new global mechanisms are not going to infringe upon its sovereignty by delving into particularly sensitive cases such as Tibet. 

United Nations Operation in Burundi disarms rebel forces in Mbanda in February 2005 (Photo: Flickr/UN Photo/Martine Perret)
03 June 2015 by Janet H. Anderson, The Hague (The Netherlands)

Over the last month, Burundi has hit the headlines as the president put himself forward to be elected for a controversial third term, resulting in street protests, thousands of refugees who fled instability and an attempted coup. Behind the issues of elections and constitutionalism are also those of justice following Burundi’s long-running civil war. The international community supported an intensive process of negotiation and the signing of the Arusha Accord in 2000. But in the decade and a half since, its provisions on justice have been debated though never fully implemented.

06 November 2006 by Pierre Hazan

France's attitude towards international criminal justice is marked by ambiguity. Paris subscribes to a vision of the world in which international humanitarian law is considered a way to curb violence against civilian populations, but at the same time it is wary of an unchecked judicial system that could end up prosecuting French soldiers engaged in areas where it has old and deep-rooted interests.