For weeks now, the debate on the draft constitution has been on almost every Kenyan's lips. For a majority of church leaders, two issues have particularly drawn their attention: Kadhi's Courts and abortion. Regarding Kadhi's Courts, the church leaders have pointed out that they are not against Muslims or Islam; their contention is that entrenching the courts, which are religion based, in the constitution is elevating one religion above others. There are also Kenyans, not necessarily Muslims, who don't understand why the inclusion of the courts should raise so much dust, yet they have been in the constitution for all along. The courts are simply a dispute resolution forum for family matters among Muslims, i.e. Marriage, divorce and inheritance, and have nothing to do with non-Muslims.
Opponents of the courts argue that our country's quest for a new constitution is to enable us to have a just society for all Kenyans; one that has an effective executive with an accountable president, an effective parliament, an efficient judiciary, and respect for the rights and responsibilities that promote an equitable, just and moral values based society. The new constitution, they say, must especially set up a judiciary that is good for all Kenyans, irrespective of class, religion or race. Muslims are an integral part of the Kenyan community and do not require special treatment or protection.
There are also those who are cautioning that entrenchment of Kadhi's court in the constitution will give them traction that could give the dreaded Sharia law a foothold in the country. They are again noting that these courts contradict the Bill of Rights since they are oppressive to women. For instance, if a woman accuses her husband of adultery, he is presumed innocent until she proves him guilty by providing at least four men (note MEN) of integrity as witnesses. On the other hand, if a man accuses his wife of the same, she is presumed guilty until she proves herself innocent!
In defence of the Courts, the Muslims argue that the courts are harmless since they do not affect non-Muslims and they have no intention of introducing Sharia law in Kenya since Kenya is a secular and not an Islamic state. This justification has been countered by those pointing out that if the courts cater for Muslims only then they should not be in the constitution since the constitution is a universal document that should cater for all Kenyans equally. As for Sharia law, Nigeria is given as an example where Sharia is stringently applied in some parts of the country despite Nigeria being a secular state like ours.
The bottom-line: this constitution is not about what Christians want or what Muslims want but rather what Kenyans want. The constitution must not perpetuate past injustices or divide the people along religious or other lines. We want to remain one nation, one land with one law that caters for all irrespective of religious affiliation.
Do not be deceived by people who have personal interests in the draft constitution. Read it for yourself. Make the right decision come the referendum day.
