Britain's duty to Kenya

A case brought by former Mau Mau fighters suggests Britain is shirking its human rights responsibilities in Kenya
    • Jump to comments ()
Mau Mau prisoners
Mau Mau prisoners of the British were held in terrible conditions, according to recent studies. Photograph: Terrence Spencer/Time & Life Pictures/Getty Image

A case involving Kenyans claiming that they suffered atrocities at the hands of the British colonial authorities is arousing interest among human rights campaigners in Kenya. Most Kenyans are eager to see the outcome of the case, because the treatment of Mau Mau fighters after Kenya became independent is a sensitive subject.

The British authorities are said to be using an "obscure" legal principle to throw out the case, arguing that the Kenyan government is now responsible for what took place when Kenya was a British colony. Many books have been written about how some Mau Mau fighters, and anyone suspected of being sympathetic to what the British then regarded as a "terror group", were moved into detention camps between 1952 and 1960. Some victims still have scars to show for what they say were beatings inflicted on them by the colonialists.

Worse, when they were released after the emergency, most found themselves homeless and destitute. One of the most serious charges that the post-colonial government faced in the late 1960s and 1970s was that it neglected the freedom fighters so much that even after independence, most of them were consigned to poverty.

The fighters expected that the government would at least give them some land. Instead, they claimed, the government sidelined them and rewarded those who were not anywhere near the freedom struggle. Thus, most remained poor and bitter. It is no wonder then that the only way out of this was through the court case in Britain, which, so far is not showing signs of going their way. Human rights groups here feel that even with the law of succession that the British are citing, the government's decision is self-serving.

The human rights lawyer Paul Muite, who is also a former member of parliament, describes the decision as "shameless and immoral". "These were terrible atrocities committed by British soldiers, not by the government of Kenya," he said. "These people were fighting for justice, liberty and their land."

The British government's decision is hypocritical especially because the British have been some of the most vocal when it comes to attacking other country's, and especially Kenya's, human rights record. But when it comes to righting their own record, they are apparently shirking responsibility. The Kenyan government has also not escaped blame. The government has been deafeningly silent, leaving NGOs and other well-wishers to pursue the case and raising questions as to whether it's offering any support to the litigants. Yet, as Muite notes, it is those who are in power today who were the greatest beneficiaries of the liberty that those now in court were fighting for. The silence of key government officials seems to perpetuate the feeling of isolation that these fighters have had all along.

A favourable outcome to this case might serve as a vindication of sorts but it will also summon up many similar complaints. And it will, no doubt, create a precedent which would make it possible for other people in former British colonies to bring similar cases. A couple of years ago, a group of women in the Rift Valley area of Samburu took British soldiers to court claiming that they had raped them and fathered children. The success of the case saw many other women come forward with similar claims. Will this one have the same effect? Perhaps only if it succeeds. If it does not, it will only multiply the woes of the Mau Mau fighters and deepen the alienation the victims of British soldiers feel.

Latest posts

Today's best video

Today in pictures