Decision of the Commission on the Merits
171. Based on the above, the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights:
1. Finds that the Republic of Kenya has violated Articles 1, 2, 3, 5, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16,17(1) and 18 of
the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights;
2. Requests the Republic of Kenya to
a) Establish objective, transparent and non-discriminatory criteria and procedures for determining
Kenyan Citizenship;
b) Recognize Nubian land rights over Kibera by taking measures to grant them security of tenure;
c) Take measures to ensure that any evictions from Kibera are carried out in accordance with
international human rights standards.
3. Inform the Commission, in accordance with Rule 112 (2) of the Commission's Rules of Procedure,
within one hundred and eighty days (180) of the notification of the present decision of the measures
taken to implement the present decision.
Done in Banjul, The Gambia at the 17th Extraordinary Session of the African Commission on Human
and Peoples' Rights held from 19 - 28 February 2015.
1
1 See for example Communication 204 (1997), Mouvement Burkinabé des droits de l'homme et des
Peuples vs Burkina Faso, Fourteenth Annual Activity Report, para 4,14 and 36.
2 Report 14/89, Case 9641 (Ecuador),12 April 1989], Annual Report of the Inter-American Commission on
Human and Peoples' Rights,1988-1989, OEA/Ser.LV/II/76, Doc.10, pp.104-15.
3 Report 1a/88, Case 9755 (Chile), 12 September 1988, Annual Report of the Inter-American Commission
on Human and Peoples' Rights,1987-1988, OEA/Ser.LV/II/74,Doc. 10,rev.1,pp.132-9.
4 Ibid.
5 Communication 228/99-The Law Office of Ghazi Suleiman/ Sudan, 33rd Ordinary Session, Sixteenth
Annual Activity Report (2003) at para. 29.
6 See Dawda K Jawara/Gambia.
7 Recontre Africaine Pour la Defense des Droits de l'Homme v. Zambia, Comm.71/92, 21st Ordinary
Session, Tenth Annual Activity Report (1997) at para.12.
8 See Akdivar v. Turkey at para.68.
9 Ibid.
10 Ibid.
11 Article 37(3)
× When the petitioner contends that he is unable to prove exhaustion as indicated in this Article, it shall be
up to the government against which this petition has been lodged to demonstrate to the Commission that
the remedies under domestic law have not previously been exhausted, unless it is clearly evident from the
background information contained in the petition.
of the Regulations adopted in OAS Doc. OAE. Ser. L. V/II.82 doc. 6, rev.1 at 103(1992).
12 Exceptions and Exhaustions of Domestic Remedies (Art. 46(1)), 46(2)(A) and 46(2)(B) American
Convention on Human Rights, Ser. A, No.11, Advisory Opinion OC-11/90 of (10 August 1990) at para.23;
Velasquez Rodriguez Case, Ser. C, No.4(29 July 1988) at para. 166; and Godinez Cruz Case, Ser. C, No.5
(20 January 1999 (sic!) 1989) at para. 175.
13 Loayza Tamayo Case, Preliminary Objections, Ser. C,No.25 (31 January 1996) at para.40.
14 Famara Kone v. Senegal, Comm. No. 386/1989, views adopted 21 October 1994, at para5.3.
15 See for example the Social and Economic Rights Action Centre and the Centre for Economic and Social
Rights v Nigeria, Communication No.155/96, para 37-39, 2001.
16 See for example, Amnesty International v Sudan, Communication Nos. 48/90, 50/91, 89/93; Malawi
African Association v Mauritania, Communications 54/91, 61/91, 98/93, 164/93, 196/97, 210/98; and Free
Legal Assistance Group v Zaire, Communications 25/89, 47/90, 56/91 and 100/93.
17 Sir Dawda Jawara v The Gambia, communication 147/95 and 149/96
23