Legal Aid Clinics & Externships

In a major leap, the 2010 Constitution of Kenya recognises international law as part of the domestic legal order. This provides courts with the opportunity to seek inspiration from the non-municipal legal framework when resolving disputes. However, the manner in which the Constitution incorporates
international law is ambiguous and confusing. It fails to create a rank that can be used to resolve conflicts between local legislation and a rule of international law. This lack of affirmation of the place of international law in the normative rank has spawned judicial interpretation that has accorded
international law the same status as statute law. This not only diminishes the weight that courts should place on international law, but also provides courts with a certain amount of discretion whenever a conflict with an Act of Parliament arises. In addition to treaties ratified by Kenya, the Constitution also refers to ‘general rules of international law’ as being part of the law of Kenya. This phrase is problematic because, first, it is one not generally used to refer to sources of legal norms in international law. Secondly, it makes it difficult for courts to ascertain where customary international law falls within the scheme of sources of legal norms. There has been a general tendency to equate general rules of international law with customary international law in a manner that is strenuous and confusing. Because courts may not be best placed to devise an interpretation that affirms the content and nature of international law in the legal system, a constitutional amendment has become an imperative if the uncertainty is to be removed.

Health Act 2017, right to health, health law, article 43 Constitution, highest attainable standard to health, bill of rights, Kenya health law, Kenya Health Professions Oversight Authority, Kenya Health Intergovernmental Consultative Forum, Kenya Health Human Resource Advisory Council, amendment of Health Act

In a major leap, the 2010 Constitution of Kenya recognises international law as part of the domestic legal order. This provides courts with the opportunity to seek inspiration from the non-municipal legal framework when resolving disputes. However, the manner in which the Constitution incorporates international law is ambiguous and confusing. It fails to create a rank that can be used to resolve conflicts between local legislation and a rule of international law. This lack of affirmation of the place of international law in the normative rank has spawned judicial interpretation that has accorded international law the same status as statute law. This not only diminishes the weight that courts should place on international law, but also provides courts with a certain amount of discretion whenever a conflict with an Act of Parliament arises. In addition to treaties ratified by Kenya, the Constitution also refers to 'general rules of international law' as being part of the law of Kenya. This phrase is problematic because, first, it is one not generally used to refer to sources of legal norms in international law. Secondly, it makes it difficult for courts to ascertain where customary international law falls within the scheme of sources of legal norms. There has been a general tendency to equate general rules of international law with customary international law in a manner that is strenuous and confusing. Because courts may not be best placed to devise an interpretation that affirms the content and nature of international law in the legal system, a constitutional amendment has become an imperative if the uncertainty is to be removed.

The Advocates Act Cap 16 and The Advocate (Admission) Regulations made thereunder 5 Regulation 3 of the Advocate (Admission) Regulations requires students to undertake a course of legal education at an institution established for the purpose e.g. the current institution is the Kenya School of Law where students learn practical courses. 6 At the faculty this occurs after the second year of study and takes a period of about 6 weeks.

Health Act 2017, right to health, health law, article 43 Constitution, highest attainable standard to health, bill of rights, Kenya health law, Kenya Health Professions Oversight Authority, Kenya Health Intergovernmental Consultative Forum, Kenya Health Human Resource Advisory Council, amendment of Health Act

In a major leap, the 2010 Constitution of Kenya recognises international law as part of the domestic legal order. This provides courts with the opportunity to seek inspiration from the non-municipal legal framework when resolving disputes. However, the manner in which the Constitution incorporates international law is ambiguous and confusing. It fails to create a rank that can be used to resolve conflicts between local legislation and a rule of international law. This lack of affirmation of the place of international law in the normative rank has spawned judicial interpretation that has accorded international law the same status as statute law. This not only diminishes the weight that courts should place on international law, but also provides courts with a certain amount of discretion whenever a conflict with an Act of Parliament arises. In addition to treaties ratified by Kenya, the Constitution also refers to 'general rules of international law' as being part of the law of Kenya. This phrase is problematic because, first, it is one not generally used to refer to sources of legal norms in international law. Secondly, it makes it difficult for courts to ascertain where customary international law falls within the scheme of sources of legal norms. There has been a general tendency to equate general rules of international law with customary international law in a manner that is strenuous and confusing. Because courts may not be best placed to devise an interpretation that affirms the content and nature of international law in the legal system, a constitutional amendment has become an imperative if the uncertainty is to be removed.

ABSTRACT
This dissertation involves the review and analysis of the Responsibility to Protect civilians in armed conflict in light of the ongoing conflict in Syria. The Responsibility to Protect  is an emerging concept  of  international  law that involves  the intervention of the international community in the  protection of  civilians against war crimes, ethnic  cleansing, genocide and human atrocities  in situations where states have either been unable or unwilling to accord  such protection .This  responsibility according  to the International Commission on Intervention in State Sovereignty (ICISS) document includes  the responsibility to prevent, rebuild and react  where  necessary.
This dissertation will benefit heavily on quantitative methods of research ranging from books on humanitarian and human rights law, books on the successes, challenges and failures of the Responsibility to Protect, United Nations General Assembly reports and publications dealing on this topic, journal articles, newspaper articles and other internet sources. 
This study will evaluate the nature and scope of the Responsibility to Protect both at the international and regional levels, challenges faced in its implementation and the recommendations to optimize its application. It also seeks to analyze the ongoing conflict in Syria as a case study since it exhibits all the necessary characteristics needed in evaluation of this principle. This dissertation also seeks to study the on-the-ground implementation of this principle. This will be through the analysis of the role played by various stake holders including regional and national actors in its realization. Of utmost importance would be the role of the Security council in the realization of the aspirations stated in the ICISS document. It is  with this  evaluation  can we get  the  true  status  of this responsibility as  an emerging  norm  of  international  law.
This dissertation also  seeks to examine the challenges encountered in the application of this responsibility. One of this challenges being the politicization the Security Council’s role in deciding instances when, where and how the Responsibility to Protect is applicable. This has been a major hindrance in the optimization of the application this responsibility. However, this may well be solved through the responsibility not to veto which in one way prohibits the permanent five members of the Security Council from using their veto power in humanitarian circumstances. Lack of specificity in the language of ICISS document has led to its misinterpretation. The ICISS document allows intervention by the international community in cases of large scale loss of life. Large scale loss of life would be construed to mean a variety of instances thus mandating further interpretation of this provision in the Outcome Document of 2005 to mean ethnic cleansing, war crime, genocide and crimes against humanity. This has restricted the variety of situations that would be catered for thus failing to offer any new solutions to the problem. This being noted, there is need to cure such defects in the document in order to realize its full optimization.