Gender Justice Court Rules: A Game-Changer for Victim Protection and Case Management

-



The judiciary is taking a major step forward in handling gender-based violence (GBV) and other gender justice cases. The newly introduced Practice Directions for Management of Gender Justice Cases, 2024 outline a structured approach to ensure fairness, efficiency, and victim-centered justice. These guidelines are a response to the growing need for specialized legal frameworks that address gender justice with sensitivity and effectiveness.

Why These Practice Directions Matter

Gender justice cases involve complex and sensitive issues, often requiring courts to balance victims’ rights, fair trial principles, and the pursuit of justice. The new practice directions aim to:

  • Enhance victim protection by ensuring privacy, dignity, and safety in court proceedings.
  • Speed up case resolution to minimize delays that may retraumatize victims.
  • Establish Gender Justice Courts with specialized judges and staff trained in handling gender-related cases.
  • Ensure compliance with international standards on gender-based violence and human rights. 

 Key Highlights of the Practice Directions

1. Strengthening Victim Protection Measures

Courts are now required to adopt strict protective measures to safeguard victims and vulnerable witnesses. These include:

  • Restricting media reporting on victims’ identities.
  • Allowing testimony through intermediaries or video conferencing.
  • Holding proceedings in private (in camera) when necessary.
  • Using pseudonyms or initials to protect identities.
  • Applying child-friendly procedures in cases involving minors.
  • Ensuring victims understand protective measures available to them.
  • This approach aligns with principles set in landmark cases like CMM & others vs Standard Group & others [2023] KESC 68 (KLR) and Joseph Lendrix Waswa vs Republic [2020] eKLR.

 

2. Victim Participation in Trials

Victims now have clearer rights to participate in court proceedings, provided their involvement does not delay justice or prejudice the accused. Courts must:

  • Assess each case individually to determine the level of victim participation.
  • Ensure victims’ concerns are heard without interfering with prosecutorial duties.
  • Allow victims or their representatives to question witnesses where necessary.
  • Maintain a fair balance between victim rights and accused persons’ rights.

3. Sentencing and Case Management

  • Sentencing in gender justice cases will follow the Sentencing Policy Guidelines and relevant laws, ensuring penalties reflect the gravity of offenses. Courts may also admit evidence before sentencing to understand the broader impact of the crime.
  • The practice directions also emphasize faster case processing to reduce delays and enhance justice delivery. This is particularly crucial in gender-based violence cases, where lengthy proceedings often discourage victims from seeking justice.

4. Establishment of Gender Justice Courts

To handle gender-related cases effectively, the Chief Justice can now designate specific courts as Gender Justice Courts. These courts will:

  • Have specialized registries dedicated to gender justice cases.
  • Be staffed by trained judicial officers with experience in handling gender-sensitive matters.
  • Ensure victim-friendly environments to prevent re-traumatization.
  • Each Gender Justice Court will maintain a Gender Justice Court Register, where case details are securely recorded, and access is strictly regulated.

5. Defining Gender Justice Cases

A case qualifies as a Gender Justice Case if it involves:

  • Violence, coercion, or restriction of freedoms based on gender or sex.
  • Physical, sexual, psychological, or economic harm.
  • Gender-based offenses committed in public or private spaces, including during armed conflict.

The courts will handle cases under several key laws, including:

  • Protection Against Domestic Violence Act
  • Sexual Offences Act
  • Prohibition of Female Genital Mutilation Act
  • Victims Protection Act
  • Penal Code provisions on sexual and violent crimes
  • Counter-Trafficking in Persons Act
  • Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes Act (for cyber harassment and revenge porn cases)

What This Means for the Future

  • The Practice Directions for Management of Gender Justice Cases, 2024 mark a significant shift in how gender-based violence and related cases are handled in Kenya’s legal system. By prioritizing victim protection, specialized courts, and faster case resolution, the judiciary is taking a bold step toward gender justice.
  • For victims, these changes mean greater access to justice in a system that prioritizes their dignity and safety. For legal practitioners, it signals the need for enhanced training and specialization in gender justice.
  • The road ahead requires collaboration between the judiciary, law enforcement, legal professionals, and advocacy groups to ensure that these reforms translate into real impact. The future of gender justice in Kenya depends on how effectively these new directives are implemented and how committed stakeholders are to upholding them.

Final Thoughts

  • Gender justice is not just about legal reforms—it’s about changing lives. With these new practice directions, Kenya is paving the way for a fairer, safer, and more inclusive legal system. Now, it’s up to all of us—judges, lawyers, activists, and citizens—to make sure justice is truly served.
  • Here are key sections of the Practice Directions for Management of Gender Justice Cases, 2024 as quoted in the legislation:

1. Victim Protection Measures

  • Section 40 – “In the conduct of proceedings relating to Gender Justice Cases, the court shall take necessary measures to protect the victim.”
Section 42 – “Victim protection measures the court may employ include:  
    • (a) not holding other sittings in the courtroom for gender justice cases;  
    • (b) ensuring victims’ dignity, privacy, and well-being at all times;  
    • (c) restricting media reporting on victims’ identities per guidelines 
    • (d) applying provisions on reporting cases involving child victims;  
    • (e) limiting courtroom attendance to authorized persons in children’s matters; 
    • (f) allowing in-camera proceedings;  
    • (g) using pseudonyms or initials for victims;  
    • (h) informing victims/vulnerable witnesses of protective measures taken…”

2. Victim Participation in Trials

  • Section 43 – “The court shall take necessary measures to ensure the rights of victims to participate in a trial guided by relevant principles and case laws (including those from Joseph Lendrix Waswa vs. Republic [2020] eKLR).”
  • Section 44 – “The court must be satisfied that granting the victim participatory rights shall not occasion an undue delay in the proceedings.”

3. Sentencing

  • Section 45 – “Sentencing shall follow the prevailing Law and the Sentencing Policy Guidelines.”
  • Section 46 – “Before passing a sentence, the court may receive evidence to inform itself under section 24 (g) of the Penal Code and sections 175 and 329 of the Criminal Procedure Code.”

4. Establishment of Gender Justice Courts

  • Section 9 – “The Chief Justice may, by notice in the Gazette, designate any court as a Gender Justice Court.”
  • Section 10 – “Upon designation as a Gender Justice Court, these Practice Directions shall thereby apply to the court, and a Gender Justice Court Registry shall be established in accordance with Direction No. 12.”

5. Criteria for Gender Justice Cases 

According to the Second Schedule, a case qualifies as a Gender Justice Case if it involves:

  • Section (a) – “Use or threat of use of any form of violence, coercion or arbitrary deprivation or restriction of freedoms (liberty).”
  • Section (b) – “Which results or is likely to result in physical, sexual, psychological, or economic harm/injury or a combination thereof.”
  • Section (c) – “Meted out on the basis of gender or sex of the victim.”
  • Section (f) – “The victim must be a natural person.”

6. Applicable Laws Under Gender Justice Cases;- 

The Practice Directions apply to cases under various laws, including:

  • Protection Against Domestic Violence Act, No. 2 of 2015 (Whole Act)
  • Sexual Offences Act, No. 3 of 2006 (Whole Act)
  • Prohibition of Female Genital Mutilation Act, No. 32 of 2011 (Whole Act)

Penal Code (Cap 63) – Relevant sections include:

  • Section 146 (Defiling persons living with mental disability)
  • Section 151 (Detention of females for immoral purposes)
  • Section 174 (Child stealing)
  • Section 203 (Murder)
  • Section 251A (Insulting modesty by forcible stripping)
  • Sections 254 – 266A (Offences of abduction and kidnapping)

Counter-Trafficking in Persons Act, No. 28 of 2010 – Relevant sections include:

  • Section 3 (Trafficking in persons)
  • Section 5 (Promotion of trafficking in persons)

Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes Act, No. 5 of 2018 – Relevant sections include:

  • Section 22 (False publications if they relate to SGBV)
  • Section 27 (Cyber harassment)
  • Section 37 (Wrongful distribution of obscene or intimate images) 

  • Election Offences Act, No. 37 of 2016 – Section 11 (Using force or violence during the election period). 

These legal references provide the foundation for enforcing gender justice through specialized courts.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why States obey International Law?

-
Image
It is a questionable attempt to try to define how many states follow and follow not the international law yet this law is at the centre of gravity that binds may laws.    Hart on his book  How Nations Behave  state clearly that:     ‘ Obedience to international rules as conforming or complying but never obeying’. He also adds that, almost all nations observe principals and obligation s almost all the time .Hence this  whole conception wrestles scholars on the view of theoretical versus practical approach . Hence it’s an impassive idea that most state truly follow these laws among exceptional cases where the state obedience is betrayed. Primarily, the first reason is on state consent feature. The Latin clause Pacta sunt servanda and Opinio juris sive necessiatis poses that ‘treaties shall be complied with’ and ‘practice must be followed’ brings about the full idea of obedience to treaty based relations by which states enter into binding contracts wh...
Read more

ADVOCATES CONFLICT OF INTEREST CASE LAWS WITH SAMPLE PLEADINGS

-
Image
  1.      Charles Gitonga Kariuki v Akuisi Farmers Co. Ltd [1] The firm of Karanja Mbugua & Company advocates had acted for the plaintiff in a claim seeking to recover a debt of Kshs. 3 million from the defendant. The defendant’s counsel raised a preliminary objection challenging the appointment of the plaintiff’s advocates firm submitting that they had acted for the defendant in several other cases. He submitted that the defendants were apprehensive that the plaintiff’s counsel would use information acquired from the defendant to their disadvantage. The court held that it is not enough for the applicant to allege that opposing counsel acted for the defendant in several matters because the simple fact that the advocate acted for a litigant does not lead per se to a conflict of interest. The court dismissed the preliminary objection on the ground that the applicant had not tendered evidence that showed that the plaintiff’s counsel had been intimately invol...
Read more

JUDICIAL OFFICERS & CONFLICT OF INTEREST CASE LAW

-
Image
JUDICIAL OFFICERS & CONFLICT OF INTEREST CASE LAW   1.       Philip Tunoi v Judicial Service Commission and another The applicants had made a formal application by notice of motion seeking the recusal of the presiding judges; t he Hon. Mr. Justice G. B. M. Kariuki, and the Hon. Mr. Justice Milton Asike Makhandia from hearing an appeal. The appeal in question concerned a petition that had been dismissed in the High Court relating to the retirement age of the applicants as Court of Appeal judges.   The applicants sought the recusal of Hon. Mr. Justice G. B. M. Kariuki on the basis that he had previously been convicted of contempt of court in the Court of Appeal by a bench that included the first appellant. Secondly, the Hon. Mr. Justice Milton Asike Makhandia regularly frequented Karen Country Club in the company of the attorney general who is a member of the JSC (the 1 st  respondent) and had regularly discussed this matter with the AG. The cou...
Read more