The Jurisprudence of Kenya's Court of Appeal on Socio-Economic Rights

Abstract

The Court of Appeal, in its jurisprudence on socio-economic rights, has shown its inflexibility in adjusting to the demands of the transformative nature of 2010 Constitution. The decision of the Court in the Mitu-Bell case tells it all. Its refusal to appreciate the difficult context within which socio-economic rights are justiciable and its lack of enthusiasm in ensuring that the socio-economic rights of disadvantaged Kenyans, especially the right to housing, are realized through judicial adjudication to redress violations of such rights is a testimony of the Court’s deep seated pro-private property stance.

The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mitu-Bell has been the cannon fodder for many legal scholars and commentators who see the Court as the ‘place where jurisprudence dies.’ Post Mitu-Bell, the Court of Appeal has been referred to as human rights graveyard. It has been said that the decision threatens to plunge the country back to the old ages where the realization of socio-economic rights was subject to the whims of the state.