By :Mwalimu Muthisya
The Kenya National Commission on Human Rights (KNCHR) was established as a vital institution to protect and promote human rights across Kenya.
Its mandate, as outlined in the Kenyan Constitution, is to ensure that the fundamental rights and freedoms of all citizens are respected, upheld, and protected.
However, recent observations and criticisms suggest that the KNCHR’s focus may be skewed, raising concerns about its impartiality and commitment to its core mandate.
One of the most pressing issues is the perception that KNCHR is disproportionately concerned with incidents involving alleged abuses by police officers during the recently held demonstrations, while seemingly ignoring the broader spectrum of human rights violations.
During periods of civil unrest, the focus on police conduct is undoubtedly important. Still, it is equally crucial to address the full range of human rights abuses, including the violence inflicted on police officers and the destruction of private property by rioters.
The commission’s selective attention has raised eyebrows. For instance, during violent demonstrations, KNCHR’s critiques are often directed at the police, while the injuries and losses suffered by officers and civilians whose businesses are looted or destroyed seem to receive minimal attention.
This apparent bias undermines the commission’s role as an impartial arbiter of human rights.
The issue extends beyond current unrest. Historical events, such as the tragic discovery of bodies at Shakahola and River Yala during the previous administration, have raised serious concerns. Despite the gravity of these incidents, there was a notable lack of intervention and scrutiny from KNCHR.
This silence stands in stark contrast to the commission’s vocal criticism of the current administration regarding similar issues.
This inconsistency in addressing human rights violations suggests a troubling trend. It appears that KNCHR may be influenced by political affiliations or pressures, which compromises its ability to function as an independent and objective body.
The commission’s actions—or lack thereof—reflect a pattern of selectively targeting certain issues while neglecting others, which casts doubt on its credibility and effectiveness.
It is imperative for KNCHR to reaffirm its commitment to impartiality and comprehensive human rights advocacy.
The commission must expand its focus to include all facets of human rights issues, regardless of political implications or pressures.
This means addressing abuses by all parties involved in conflict, recognizing the rights and safety of both civilians and police officers, and advocating for victims of violence and property destruction equally.
Furthermore, KNCHR should not only critique current issues but also revisit past human rights violations with the same level of scrutiny and urgency.
This approach will enhance its credibility and reaffirm its role as a protector of all Kenyans’ rights.
In conclusion, the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights must revisit and realign its focus to ensure it serves its intended purpose: to protect and promote the rights of every Kenyan impartially.
By addressing the full spectrum of human rights issues and avoiding political biases, KNCHR can restore its credibility and effectively contribute to a just and equitable society.
