Donation Amount. Min £2

East Africa

Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua arrives at the National Assembly for impeachment hearing on October 8, 2024. [Elvis Ogina, Standard]

Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua was on Tuesday evening running against time in his fight to stop today’s Senate hearing of the Motion to impeach him.

Gachagua rushed to a three-judge Bench picked to hear his petitions after the High Court earlier rejected his prayer to stop the process.

His lawyer Paul Muite asked Justices Eric Ogola, Fridah Mugambi and Anthony Mrima to hear their prayer for conservatory orders before the Senate starts its proceedings today. 

“It will be purely academic to appear tomorrow at 9am. Asking us to appear tomorrow morning, it will render our application nugatory,” argued Muite. 

Gachagua also asked the Bench to block President William Ruto from submitting the name of a nominee for the Office of Deputy President to Parliament until the cases are heard and determined.

After a back and forth between the lawyers on if the court should sit at 6pm yesterday or at 9am today, the judges decided to hear them late in the evening.

Early in the day, Justice Chacha Mwita had ruled that while the High Court has jurisdiction to hear and determine his petition, it could not interfere with Parliament’s legislative authority.  

“The court cannot injunct the Senate from carrying its constitutional mandate on impeaching the deputy president,” he said.

“There should be a delicate balance in the respective mandates of different arms of government. Courts should strive to achieve this balance and respect what Parliament is constitutionally required to fulfill.” 

Mwita explained that the Constitution has laid out the mechanisms through which governors, the president and his deputy can be impeached, noting that courts can only intervene in cases of outright constitutional violations.

He argued that the Supreme Court has previously addressed the issue of courts interfering with the business of tribunals and quasi-judicial bodies.

Mwita noted that Gachagua’s impeachment is a first in Kenya’s history and that Parliament should be given the opportunity to conclude the process. 

He acknowledged that Gachagua’s case raises new claims regarding public participation, alleged violations of his constitutional rights, and the fairness of the procedure invoked by the National Assembly to impeach him last week.

In his last-minute effort to salvage his political career, Gachagua told the three judges that Justice Mwita had observed that the issues raised were weighty.

However, the National Assembly argued that it would be unfair to hear and make a ruling on the same issue that Justice Mwita had ruled on.

In the meantime, lawyer Ndegwa Njiru argued that the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission had not been constituted, hence the court should determine if the President could appoint a new deputy president.

The three judges directed that they would give each party seven minutes and give their verdict at 8am today. 

In the case before Mwita, Gachagua’s legal team had argued that the impeachment process was flawed, and that the DP was not afforded a fair hearing due to the limited time of 12 days. 

Muite contended that the standing orders guiding the impeachment contravened constitutional requirements for due process.

Further, Gachagua told the court that the impeachment Motion amounted to a “vicarious assault” rather than a legitimate inquiry, alleging that the proceedings were marred by intimidation and undue influence on MPs.

He accused the National Assembly of rushing the process to avoid judicial oversight, thus undermining constitutional principles.

The DP’s legal team criticised the impeachment as a personal attack on him and his family, claiming that the accusations did not meet the threshold of gross misconduct. 

Muite also argued that the Motion violated the legal doctrine of exhaustion, asserting that alternative remedies should have been explored before resorting to impeachment. 

He also claimed that the public participation mandated by law was insufficient and shambolic, depriving Kenyans of a meaningful opportunity to engage in such a critical process. 

To demonstrate this, Muite cited Keiyo South Constituency in Elgeyo Marakwet County, where he alleged that records indicated that 43 people participated in the exercise but the outcome indicated that 71 supported the impeachment while three opposed.

“Senators may choose to uphold the National Assembly’s resolution, and within an hour, a new Deputy President could be appointed,” Muite noted

The Senate and the National Assembly had opposed the prayer, asserting that Gachagua would have the opportunity to defend himself. 

“The Deputy President has not demonstrated that this petition will be rendered moot if the Senate is allowed to proceed with its constitutional mandate,” argued Senate Speaker Amason Kingi. By Kamau Muthoni and Nancy Gitonga, The Standard

Vasundhara Oswal has been in prison since October 1, the family claims.

Pankaj Oswal claims his daughter Vasundhara has been illegally detained in Uganda, facing false charges and denied legal representation since October .

Pankaj Oswal, a renowned Swiss industrialist of Indian origin, has alleged that his 26-year-old daughter, Vasundhara Oswal, has been illegally imprisoned in Uganda. In an open letter to the Ugandan President, the industrialist also claimed that his 26-year-old daughter is being denied basic rights and access to family or legal representation. 

According to Oswal, Vasundhara, executive director of PRO Industries, has been detained without trial since October 1. due to "corporate and political manipulation". Oswal claims the charges against his daughter stem from false allegations made by a former employee who stole valuables and took a $200,000 loan with Oswal's family as guarantors.

Oswal has filed an urgent appeal with the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, stating that Vasundhara was interrogated under degrading conditions and held for over 90 hours without access to legal counsel or family. Despite a court order for her unconditional release, the police have reportedly slapped inadmissible charges to prevent her release on bail.

"Not letting her be in touch with her family and lawyers and also snatching her phone from her, causing her to have an anxiety attack, which they did not acknowledge. This all while she is still being unlawfully detained with no evidence against her," the family said in a post on Vasundhara's official Instagram account. Hindustan Times

 

The Leader of the Opposition, Hon. Joel Ssenyonyi, observed that when the Bill was brought before Parliament, it was not signed, which raised concerns over the sponsor of the Bill 

Consideration of the Uganda National Kiswahili Council Bill, 2023 stalled for a second time during a plenary sitting held on Monday, 14 October 2024.  While chairing the sitting, the Speaker, Anita Among, tasked the Ministry of Education and Sports, and the Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Development, to harmonise their positions on the Bill before its Second Reading.

“I held a meeting with Hon. Mutuuzo and Hon. Ogwang in my office. Hon. Mutuuzo said it was a cabinet position to have the Bill under Ministry of Gender, whereas Hon. Ogwang said the Bill belongs to Ministry of Education. I am directing that both ministers come to the Floor on Wednesday with a harmonised position,” said Among.

Her directive follows concerns by some legislators who questioned the ownership of the Bill and the need for a Kiswahili Council.

The Leader of the Opposition, Hon. Joel Ssenyonyi, observed that when the Bill was brought before Parliament, it was not signed, which raised concerns over the sponsor of the Bill.

He also noted discrepancies on where the Bill should be housed, adding that the Attorney General did not offer clarification on the ministry in charge of the Bill.

“We told government to get itself in order, and then retable this Bill. We shall then know who to hold accountable. Even if you insist and somehow it gets to pass, it will be challenged in court and you do not want that,” said Ssenyonyi.

Hon. Elijah Okupa (Indep., Kasilo County) and Hon. Jonathan Ebwalu (Indep., Soroti West Division) questioned why government proposed a council to manage Kiswahili, compared to other languages taught in schools across the country.

“Swahili is not the first language Ugandans are learning. We have Luganda, Ateso, German and French being taught in schools, but we do not have councils for these languages,” Okupa said.

“My humble view is that you make Kiswahili compulsory in schools, rather than bringing this council. We are talking of rationalisation but you want to bring people to manage the council. Are you going to bring the Luganda council, the Kumam council, the Ateso council?” Ebwalu asked.

Hon. Henry Kibalya (NRM, Bugabula County) said that the education ministry is charged with language education and as such ought to manage the proposed Kiswahili Council, rather than the gender ministry.

“The Ministry of Education was introduced in this government to handle whatever concerns education. Whether education is in Lusoga or Lugbara, it is the Ministry of Education in charge,” Kibalya said.

The Minister of State for Gender, Labour and Social Development (Gender and Culture). Hon. Peace Mutuuzo, told the House that the proposed Bill is sponsored by her ministry under provisions of the Constitution.

“This Bill is sponsored by the Ministry of Gender not by error. The ministry is sponsoring the Bill because it is mandated under Objective 24 of the Constitution, Article 6 on Languages as well as Article 37 on the Rights of Culture and similar Rights,” Mutuuzo said.

The Speaker, however, reiterated her position on a harmonised position, to avoid retrospective signing of the Bill.

The object of the Bill is to provide for the establishment of the Uganda National Kiswahili Council, its functions, its linkage with local governments and its funds, among others, after Article 6(2) of the Constitution made Kiswahili the second official language of Uganda. Distributed by APO Group on behalf of Parliament of the Republic of Uganda.

By Human Rights Watch

An illustration of the “Yordani”, a torture site within Nyarugenge and Rubavu prisons in Rwanda where detainees were forced into a tank filled with dirty water, submerged and beaten.  © 2024 John Holmes for Human Rights Watch

Landmark Trial of Prison Officials Begins to Crack the Wall of Impunity.

  • For decades, Rwandan authorities have subjected detainees, in both official and unofficial detention facilities, to ill-treatment and torture with no accountability.
  • A landmark trial of prison officials for murder, torture, and assault, concluded in April, demonstrated that it is possible to begin to break through the entrenched practice of torture.
  • The government should conduct a comprehensive investigation into torture in Rwanda’s prisons, with help from the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights and United Nations experts. 

(Nairobi) – For decades, Rwandan authorities have subjected detainees, in both official and unofficial detention facilities, to ill-treatment and torture, with no accountability, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today. Nevertheless, a landmark trial of 6 prison officials and 12 detainees for murder, torture, and assault at Rubavu prison, concluded in April 2024, demonstrated that it is possible to begin to break through the entrenched practice of torture in Rwanda.

The 22-page report, “‘They Threw Me in the Water and Beat Me’: The Need for Accountability for Torture in Rwanda,” documents torture and ill-treatment by prison officials and detainees in Nyarugenge prison in the capital, Kigali; in Rubavu prison, western Rwanda; and in an unofficial detention facility in Kigali known as “Kwa Gacinya.” Human Rights Watch found that judges ignored complaints from current and former detainees about the unlawful detention and ill-treatment, creating an environment of near-total impunity.

“Our research demonstrates that prison officials have been allowed to torture detainees with impunity for years, highlighting the failures of Rwanda’s institutions mandated to safeguard detainees’ rights,” said Clémentine de Montjoye, senior Africa researcher at Human Rights Watch. “The landmark trial of prison officials provides an important first step toward accountability, but a more comprehensive response is necessary to address the deeply entrenched practice of torture in Rwanda.”

Between 2019 and 2024, Human Rights Watch interviewed more than 28 people, including 13 former detainees who had been held in unofficial detention sites and in Rubavu and Nyarugenge prisons between 2017 and 2024. Human Rights Watch reviewed YouTube interviews of former prisoners who described being tortured in detention and court documents relating to the trials of 53 people. Among those were some who testified at the trial of the former director at both Nyarugenge and Rubavu prisons, Innocent Kayumba, and 17 others on charges of torture, beatings, murder, and other offenses.

Former detainees told Human Rights Watch about the ordeal detainees faced in sites referred to as “Yordani” that existed in both prisons, where detainees were forced into a tank filled with dirty water, submerged, and beaten. Some said detainees were then made to run around the courtyard barefoot until they collapsed.

Kayumba was director of Rubavu prison until 2019, when he was transferred to Nyarugenge, the same year as the killing of a detainee for which he would eventually stand trial. In Nyarugenge, he put in place the same system to inflict torture, former detainees said. Human Rights Watch obtained the names of 11 prisoners whom former detainees said died in detention following beatings. Several of those cases were brought forward during Kayumba’s trial.

Human Rights Watch found a pattern of ill-treatment, mock executions, beatings, and torture at Kwa Gacinya which dates back to at least 2011. In Kwa Gacinya, former detainees said they were held in “coffin-like” cells and were regularly beaten and forced to confess to the crimes with which they were charged, before being transferred to an official detention facility. Human Rights Watch received information that Kwa Gacinya is now being used as a police office, although two sources connected to the security services said that the abuse continues in its basement.

On April 5, the Rubavu High Court convicted Kayumba of the assault and murder of a detainee at Rubavu prison in 2019 and sentenced him to 15 years in prison and a fine of 5 million Rwandan Francs (about US$3,700). Two other Rwanda Correctional Service officers and seven prisoners, who were accused of acting under instruction, were convicted of beating and killing prisoners. Three other correctional service officials were acquitted.

The trial delivered only partial justice, Human Rights Watch said. Officials were convicted of assault and murder, but acquitted of torture, which carries a heavier penalty. Several senior prison officials were acquitted despite the apparently damning evidence presented against them by former detainees. The prisoners who were ordered to beat fellow detainees were given longer sentences of up to 25 years.

Rwanda’s National Commission for Human Rights (NCHR) is not independent and has been unable or unwilling to report on cases of torture. In May, Human Rights Watch submitted a third-party report to the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions, which monitors national human rights institutions’ compliance with the Principles relating to the Status of National Institutions (The Paris Principles), ahead of its October review of the NCHR’s work.

Rwandan authorities routinely curtail the work of institutions with a mandate to monitor prison conditions and prevent torture. At the international level, the Rwandan government has obstructed the United Nations and other institutions from carrying out essential monitoring work in an independent manner.

In May, Human Rights Watch offered to meet with Rwanda’s justice minister and the chairperson of the NCHR to share preliminary findings of this research, but its senior researcher was denied entry upon arrival at Kigali International Airport. On September 10, Human Rights Watch sent letters to the justice minister and the NCHR sharing the findings but received no response.

Rwanda should comply with its own constitution and fulfill its obligations under international human rights law, in particular the absolute prohibition on torture and cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment, Human Rights Watch said. Rwanda’s partners, particularly those that support Rwanda’s justice sector such as the European Union, should press Rwanda’s government to intensify efforts to hold all those responsible for torture accountable.

The government should conduct a comprehensive investigation into torture in Rwanda’s prisons. To lend credibility to the investigation, the government should request the assistance of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights and UN experts and publicly report on its findings. Finally, Rwanda should cooperate with the UN Committee against Torture and submit its state party report, due since December 2021, and permit the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment to resume its visit to detention facilities unhindered.

“Kayumba’s case not only exposes serious and grave problems in Rwanda’s correctional services, but critical failings in the judiciary and the national human rights institution,” de Montjoye said. “These institutions should carry out a comprehensive investigation into ill-treatment and torture in Rwanda and carry out the necessary systemic reforms.”

Jomo Kenyatta International Airport in Nairobi.[File, Standard]

The government could have been quietly engaging Adani Group to lease Jomo Kenyatta International Airport (JKIA) for over a year, fresh details have emerged in court.

In a case where President William Ruto’s principal economic advisor David Ndii is named as a person who had been aware of the deal, it is alleged that the Indian conglomerate through Adani Airports Holding Ltd - had on April 25, 2023, submitted to Kenya Airports Authority (KAA) a privately initiated proposal (PIP) for development of JKIA under public-private partnership arrangement.

According to Tony Gachoka, Jubilee Party, Wiper Party, Democratic Action Party Kenya (DAP-K) and Mount Kenya, Adani PIP was copied to Ndii, the National Treasury and the Ministry of Roads and Transport. 

However, Gachoka’s lawyer Ndegwa Njiru claims that they remained tight-lipped about the deal until this year when Adani allegedly floated its PIP. Adani in its case claimed that it floated the idea to refurbish JKIA on March 1, 2024, after seeing the deteriorating state of the international airport in the media.

However, the Njiru alleged that the deal was being worked backwards in order to favour the firm. He argued that the idea to directly procure the construction of a new passenger terminal at JKIA was done with the Adani Group in mind.

The lawyer alleged that through a contract dated December 13, 2023, KAA  procured advisory services for the construction of a new passenger terminal building at JKIA. 

He told the court the team recommended an Airport PPP as opposed to a terminals PIP as the most beneficial to Kenya.

President William Ruto's adviser David Ndii. [File, Standard]

“Unsurprisingly, on March 1, 2024, the second respondent submitted to the KAA its PIP for the development of JKIA under PPP arrangements. On the same day, the JKIA submitted the said proposal to the 9th respondent PS Mohammed Daghar who on the same day submitted the proposal to the PS National Treasury Chris Kiptoo. The petitioners earnestly believe these activities did not take place on 1 March 2024 as demonstrated,” argued Ndegwa. 

The court heard that contrary to the government’s claim that Adani was the only firm interested in developing JKIA, other firms had floated their proposals. The lawyer claimed that Abu Dhabi, China Road and Bridge Corporation and Motar Etgil Africa/Corporation America JV had proposed to develop JKIA through PPP. He said that despite the documents being before KAA), the government never disclosed them same to the public.

“By a further letter dated June 12, 2023, referencing "Proposed Construction of a Second Runway at Jomo Kenyatta International Airport (JKIA) the 9th respondent  PS Mohamed Daghar stated that the KAA had not formally submitted the PIP submitted by Adani Airport Holdings Ltd and their preliminary appraisal of the same,” claimed Ndegwa..
He further claimed that PIP for JKIA submitted by Adani is lopsided and subversive of Kenya's public interest.

Ndegwa said that despite the government drumming up for the firm to take over JKIA for 30 years, no one can put a finger on how much Adani had invested or will pump to the project. 

The lawyer alleged that the Indian firm is being gifted JKIA without paying a penny.

“Adani Group PIP does not specify the exact amount to be invested despite the fact that investment is the principal criterion for PPP under the 2011 Policy on PPPs and subsequent legislations. For all practical purposes, the existing and potential revenue of JKIA are simply being transferred to the 2nd Respondent and its undisclosed Kenyan partners to invest for their private gain. This is a clear case of sovereign robbery,” claimed Ndegwa.The court heard that the government is going against a 2019 Parliament report that shielded JKIA from privatisation or control by foreigners. By Kamau Muthoni, The Standard

About IEA Media Ltd

Informer East Africa is a UK based diaspora Newspaper. It is a unique platform connecting East Africans at home and abroad through news dissemination. It is a forum to learn together, grow together and get entertained at the same time.

To advertise events or products, get in touch by info [at] informereastafrica [dot] com or call +447957636854.
If you have an issue or a story, get in touch with the editor through editor[at] informereastafrica [dot] com or call +447886544135.

We also accept donations from our supporters. Please click on "donate". Your donations will go along way in supporting the newspaper.

Get in touch

Our Offices

London, UK
+44 7886 544135
editor (@) informereastafrica.com
Slough, UK
+44 7957 636854
info (@) informereastafrica.com

Latest News

Israel’s Netanyahu, Gallant issued ICC arrest warrants: What’s next?

Israel’s Netanyahu,...

This is the first time there has been an indictment for Netanyahu since Israel’s war on Gaza began...

Protecting at-risk populations from mpox in the Democratic Republic of the Congo

Protecting at-risk p...

World Health Organization (WHO) is working closely with national health authorities to implement ta...

Mali military administration appoints Gen. Abdoulaye Maiga new premier

Mali military admini...

Appointment comes after military administration dismissed civilian Premier Choguel Kokalla Maiga ove...

Ruto cancels Adani's infrastructure deals after bribery allegations

Ruto cancels Adani&#...

President William Ruto.[Elvis Ogina, Standard] President William Ruto has cancelled the controversi...

For Advertisement

Big Reach

Informer East Africa is one platform for all people. It is a platform where you find so many professionals under one umbrella serving the African communities together.

Very Flexible

We exist to inform you, hear from you and connect you with what is happening around you. We do this professionally and timely as we endeavour to capture all that you should never miss. Informer East Africa is simply news for right now and the future.

Quality News

We only bring to you news that is verified, checked and follows strict journalistic guidelines and standards. We believe in 1. Objective coverage, 2. Impartiality and 3. Fair play.

Banner & Video Ads

A banner & video advertisement from our sponsors will show up every once in a while. It keeps us and our writers coffee replenished.