News & Analysis
The Challenges Hindering Access to Water in Kenya
By Dr. Kariuki Muigua, PhD (Leading Environmental Law Scholar, Policy Advisor, Natural Resources Lawyer and Dispute Resolution Expert from Kenya), Winner of Kenya’s ADR Practitioner of the Year 2021, ADR Publication of the Year 2021 and CIArb (Kenya) Lifetime Achievement Award 2021*
The provision of water services for all Kenyans still remains a challenge despite the recognition of the right to clean, safe and adequate amounts of water for all Kenyans. This may be attributed to these factors discussed below but are in no way exhaustive.
Climate Change and Access to Clean, Safe and Adequate Water
Climate change is expected to continually and negatively affect the quality of water. This is because increasing water temperatures, higher or lower groundwater levels, floods and droughts raise the threat of heightened micro-organisms, chemical substances and radiological hazards in drinking water. Thus, as far as climate change is concerned, it generally affects water supply though some of the following ways: damage to infrastructure from flooding, loss of water sources due to declining rainfall and increasing demand, and changes in the water quality of water sources and within distribution of water.
Legal and Institutional Challenges
It has been argued that while the related pressures of anthropogenic climate change and population growth will continue to make essential natural resources scarce globally, domestic and international policy has been slow to adapt to this threat. The water sector is mainly governed by the Water Act, 2016, which was enacted to provide for the regulation, management and development of water resources, water and sewerage services; and for other connected purposes. The Act was also meant to align the water sector with the Constitution’s primary objective of devolution where the Act acknowledges that water related functions are a shared responsibility between the national government and the county government.
One of the characteristics of privatization and commercialization of water resources is the need for operational permits for various uses of water. Section 36 of the Water Act 2016 provides that a permit is required for any of the following purposes- any use of water from a water resource, except as provided by section 37; the drainage of any swamp or other land; the discharge of a pollutant into any water resource; and any other purpose, to be carried out in or in relation to a water resource, which is prescribed by Regulations made under this Act to be a purpose for which a permit is required.
While the 2016 Water Act introduced the shared water management system as per the Constitution between the national and county governments, the main management structure and decision making powers were mostly left with the national government’s organs. This has often created tension between the two levels of government, each seeking to control the sector. This may have at times affected provision of water services. This is especially so where the national Government institutions such as the Water Resources Management Authority and the Water Services Regulation Authority may claim power to license and issue permits relating to water use and access while at the same time county governments may seek to control water bodies within their territories, resulting in conflicts.
Poverty levels among the Kenyan communities and especially among the urban informal settlements play a huge role in hindering access to water services considering that private water vendors who are the main suppliers of water in such areas are in business. Lack of purchasing power thus drive the households to use unsafe, dirty and inadequate amounts of water for their domestic needs.
Population Growth and Rural-Urban Migration
While the Government’s efforts have always been to ensure that both the urban and the rural areas of the country all have access to clean and adequate water, past studies have showed that the rampant population growth coupled with high rates of rural-urban migration has always left the Government struggling to meet the resultant high water demands in the urban areas due to water shortage and the pressure on the infrastructure.
Gender Inequality and Realization of Right to Water
Gender is used to refer to the different roles, rights, and responsibilities of men and women and the relations between them, that is to say, gender does not simply refer to women or men, but to the way their qualities, behaviours, and identities are determined through the process of socialization. It has rightly been argued that women and girls are disproportionately affected by the lack of access to basic water, sanitation and hygiene facilities, due to their needs during periods of increased vulnerability to infection around menstruation and reproduction as well as the fact that women and girls also have a larger role relative to men in water, sanitation and hygiene activities, including in agriculture and domestic labour.
Specifically, it has been noted that women and girls are responsible for fetching water in most households, a practice that has implications for women’s health in the form of spinal injury, neck pain, spontaneous abortion from heavy and awkward workloads, and caloric expenditure. In addition, it has rightly been argued that water-fetching responsibilities by women and girls also add to the burden of unpaid domestic work, decrease time towards other income-generating activities and affect the time for leisure and nonessential activities.
*This is article is an extract from an article by Dr. Kariuki Muigua, PhD, Kenya’s ADR Practitioner of the Year 2021 (Nairobi Legal Awards), ADR Publisher of the Year 2021 and ADR Lifetime Achievement Award 2021 (CIArb Kenya): Muigua, K., Fulfilling the Right to Water as a Socioeconomic Right for the People of Kenya, https://kmco.co.ke /wp-contentuploads/ 2020/11/Fulfilling-the-Right-to-Water-as-a-Socioeconomic-Right-for-the-People-of-Kenya-Kariuki-Muigua-Ph-D.pdf. Dr. Kariuki Muigua is Kenya’s foremost Environmental Law and Natural Resources Lawyer and Scholar, Sustainable Development Advocate and Conflict Management Expert. Dr. Kariuki Muigua is a Senior Lecturer of Environmental Law and Dispute resolution at the University of Nairobi School of Law and The Center for Advanced Studies in Environmental Law and Policy (CASELAP). He has published numerous books and articles on Environmental Law, Environmental Justice Conflict Management, Alternative Dispute Resolution and Sustainable Development. Dr. Muigua is also a Chartered Arbitrator, an Accredited Mediator, the Africa Trustee of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators and the Managing Partner of Kariuki Muigua & Co. Advocates. Dr. Muigua is recognized as one of the leading lawyers and dispute resolution experts by the Chambers Global Guide 2021.
Albuquerque, C., “Climate Change and the Human Rights to Water and Sanitation.” (2010)< https://www2.ohchr.org/ english/issues/water/iexpert/docs/ClimateChange _HRtWS.pdf> (Accessed 11 December 2021).
CESR, ‘What Are Economic, Social and Cultural Rights?’ (3 December 2008), Available at: https://www.cesr.org/what-are-economic-social-and-cultural-rights (Accessed 29 October 2020).
Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions and others (eds), Manual on the Right to Water and Sanitation: A Tool to Assist Policy Makers and Practitioners Develop Strategies for Implementing the Human Right to Water and Sanitation (Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions 2007).
Chepyegon, C. and Kamiya, D., ‘Challenges Faced by the Kenya Water Sector Management in Improving Water Supply Coverage’ (2018) 10 Journal of Water Resource and Protection 85; ‘Nairobi Water: What’s behind Severe Shortages?’ BBC News (2 November 2019) (accessed 14 December 2021).
Constitution of Kenya, Laws of Kenya, Government Printer, Nairobi, 2010.
Dawood Ahmed and Elliot Bulmer, ‘Social and Economic Rights,’ International IDEA Constitution-Building Primer 9, International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (International IDEA), Second edition, 2017, Available at: https://www.idea.int/sites/default/files/publications/social-and-economic-rights-primer.pdf (Accessed 20 October, 2020).
Dos Santos, S. and others, ‘Urban Growth and Water Access in Sub-Saharan Africa: Progress, Challenges, and Emerging Research Directions’ (2017) 607–608 Science of The Total Environment 497.
Dublin Statement on Water and Sustainable Development’ (1992) 10 Waterlines 4, Available at: http://www.cawater-info.net/library/eng/l/dublin.pdf (Accessed on 11 December 2021).
General Comment No. 15: The Right to Water (Arts. 11 and 12 of the Covenant), Adopted at the Twenty-ninth Session of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, on 20 January 2003 (Contained in Document E/C.12/2002/11).
Howard, G., and others, ‘Climate Change and Water and Sanitation: Likely Impacts and Emerging Trends for Action’ (2016) 41 Annual Review of Environment and Resources 253.
Human Rights Watch, “‘There Is No Time Left.’” (2 Jan. 2019), Available at: www.hrw.org/report/2015/ 10/15/there-no-timeleft/climate-change-environmental-threats-and-human-rights-turkana; (Accessed 1 December 2021).
Kiefer, T., Winkler, I., and Cacciaguidi-Fahy, S., “Legal Resources for the Right to Water and Sanitation. International and National Standards.” International and National Standards – 2nd Edition (2008).
McGraw, G. S. “Defining and defending the right to water and its minimum core: legal construction and the role of national jurisprudence.” Loy. U. Chi. Int’l L. Rev. 8 (2010): 127.
Lancet Global Health, ‘Water and Sanitation in a Post-COVID World’ (2020) 8 The Lancet Global Health e1101.
Levin, T., M. Nierenköther, and N. Odenwälder. “The human right to water and sanitation: Translating theory into practice.” Eschenborn, Germany: Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) GmbH (2009).
Ling San Lau and others, ‘COVID-19 in Humanitarian Settings and Lessons Learned from Past Epidemics’ (2020) 26 Nature Medicine 647.
Muigua, Kariuki. “Streamlining Water Governance in Kenya for Sustainable Development.” (2017), Available at: http://kmco.co.ke/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Streamlining-Water-Governance-in-Kenya-17TH-FEBRUARY-2017.pdf (accessed 14 December 2021).
Navarra Center for International Development, ‘Water Provision in Kenya: Problems and Challenges in Managing Finite Resources,’ http://ncid.unav.edu/en/news/water-provision-kenya-problems-and-challenges-managing-finite-resources (accessed 14 December 2021).
Nicol, A., ‘The Pandemic Is Laying Bare a Global Water Crisis’ (Foreign Policy) accessed 28 October 2020;
Safe Drinking Water Foundation, ‘Human Rights,’ Available at: https://www.safewater.org/fact-sheets-1/2017/1/23/human-rights (accessed 28 October 2020).
Sarkar, A., ‘Informal Water Vendors and the Urban Poor: Evidence from a Nairobi Slum’ (2020) 45 Water International 443.
UN-Water, ‘Water’ (21 December 2015) https://www.un.org/en/sections/issues-depth/water/ (accessed 28 October 2020).
UN-Water, ‘UN World Water Development Report 2020 “Water and Climate Change”’ (UN-Water, 21 March 2020) accessed 28 October 2020.
United Nations, CESCR General Comment No. 14: The Right to the Highest Attainable Standard of Health (Art. 12), Adopted at the Twenty-second Session of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, on 11 August 2000 (Contained in Document E/C.12/2000/4);
UN General Assembly, The Human Right to Water and Sanitation: Resolution / Adopted by the General Assembly, 3 August 2010, A/RES/64/292.
UN, ‘International Decade for Action “Water for Life” 2005-2015. Focus Areas: The Human Right to Water and Sanitation’ https://www.un.org/waterforlifedecade/human_right_to_water.shtml (accessed 21 October 2020).
UN General Assembly, Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, 21 October 2015, A/RES/70/1. 25.
Water Act, No. 43 of 2016, Laws of Kenya, Government Printer, Nairobi, 2016.
Water Project, ‘The Water Crisis: Poverty and Water Scarcity in Africa,’ Available at: https://thewaterproject.org/why-water/poverty (accessed 14 December 2021).
World Health Organization. Water, sanitation, hygiene, and waste management for the COVID-19 virus: interim guidance, 23 April 2020. No. WHO/2019-nCoV/IPC_WASH/2020.3. World Health Organization, 2020.
News & Analysis
Brief History of the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA)
By Dr. Kariuki Muigua, PhD, C.Arb, Current Member of Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) Representing the Republic of Kenya.
The Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) is a 124 Years Old Intergovernmental Organization currently with 122 contracting states. It was established at the turn of 20th Century during the first Hague Peace Conference held between 18th May and 29th July 1899. The conference was an initiative of then Russian Czar Nicholas II to discuss peace and disarmament and specifically with the object of “seeking the most effective means of ensuring to all peoples the benefits of a real and lasting peace, and, above all, of limiting the progressive development of existing armaments.” The culmination of the conference was the adoption of a Convention on the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes, which dealt not only with arbitration but also with other methods of pacific settlement, such as good offices and mediation.
The aim of the conference was to “strengthen systems of international dispute resolution” especially international arbitration which in the last century had proven effective for the purpose with number of successful international arbitrations being concluded among Nations. The Alabama arbitration of 1871-1872 between the United Kingdom (UK) and the United States (US) under the Treaty of Washington of 1871 culminating in the arbitral tribunal’s award that the UK pay the US compensation for breach of neutrality during American Civil War which it did had demonstrated the effectiveness of arbitration in settling of international disputes and piqued interest of many practitioners in it as a mode of dispute resolution during the latter years of the nineteenth century.
The Institut de Droit International adopted a code of procedure for arbitration in 1875 to answer the need for a general law of arbitration governing for countries and parties wishing to have recourse to international arbitration. The growth of arbitration as a mode of international dispute resolution formed the background of the 1899 conference and informed its most enduring achievement, namely, the establishment of the PCA as the first global mechanism for the settlement of disputes between states. Article 16 of the 1899 Convention recognized that “in questions of a legal nature, and especially in the interpretation or application of International Conventions” arbitration is the “most effective, and at the same time the most equitable, means of settling disputes which diplomacy has failed to settle.”
In turn, the 1899 Convention provided for the creation of permanent machinery to enable the setting up of arbitral tribunals as necessary and to facilitate their work under the auspices of the institution it named as the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA). In particular, Article 20 of the 1899 Convention stated that “[w]ith the object of facilitating an immediate recourse to arbitration for international differences which it has not been possible to settle by diplomacy, the signatory Powers undertake to organize a Permanent Court of Arbitration, accessible at all times and operating, unless otherwise stipulated by the parties, in accordance with the rules of procedure inserted in the present Convention.” In effect, the Convention set up a permanent system of international arbitration and institutionalized the law and practice of arbitration in a definite and acceptable way.
As a result, the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) was established in 1900 and began operating in 1902. The PCA as established consisted of a panel of jurists designated by each country acceding to the Convention with each country being entitled to designate up to four from among whom the members of each arbitral tribunal might be chosen. In addition, the Convention created a permanent Bureau, located in The Hague, with functions similar to those of a court registry or secretariat. The 1899 Convention also laid down a set of rules of procedure to govern the conduct of arbitrations under the PCA framework.
The second Hague Peace Conference in 1907 saw a revision of the 1899 Convention and improvement of the rules governing arbitral proceedings. Today, the PCA has developed into a modern, multi-faceted arbitral institution perfectly situated to meet the evolving dispute resolution needs of the international community. The Permanent Court of Arbitration has also diversified its service offering alongside those contemplated by the Conventions. For instance, today the International Bureau of the Permanent Court of Arbitration serves as a registry in important international arbitrations. In 1993, the Permanent Court of Arbitration adopted new “Optional Rules for Arbitrating Disputes between Two Parties of Which Only One Is a State” and, in 2001, “Optional Rules for Arbitration of Disputes Relating to Natural Resources and/or the Environment”.
PCA Website: https://pca-cpa.org/en/about/introduction/history/ (accessed on 25th May 2023).
News & Analysis
Former KCB Company Secretary Sues Over Unlawful Dismissal
Former KCB Group Company Secretary Joseph Kamau Kania has sued the lender seeking reinstatement or be compensated for illegal sacking almost three years ago. Lawyer Kania was the KCB Group company secretary until restructuring of the lender in 2021 that saw some senior executives dropped.
Through the firm of Senior Counsel Wilfred Nderitu, Kamau wants the court to order KCB Group to unconditionally reinstate him to employment without altering any of the contractual terms until his retirement in December 2025.
In his court documents filed before Employment and Labour Relations Court, the career law banker seeks the court to declare the reorganization of the company structure a nullity and amounted to a violation of his fundamental right to fair labour practices as guaranteed in Article 41(1) of the Constitution. He further wants the court to declare that the position of Group Company Secretary did not at any time cease to exist within the KCB Group structure.
He further urged the Employment Court to declare that the recruitment and appointment of Bonnie Okumu, his former assistant, as the Group Company Secretary, in relation to the contemporaneous termination of his employment, was unprocedural, insufficient and inappropriate to infer a lawful termination of his employment.
“A declaration that the factual and legal circumstances of the Petitioner’s termination of employment were insufficient and inappropriate to infer a redundancy against him, and that any redundancy declared by the KCB Group in relation to him was therefore null, void and of no legal effect and amounted to a violation of his fundamental right to fair labour practices as guaranteed in Article 41(1) of the Constitution,” seeks lawyer Kamau.
Kamau says he was subjected to discriminatory practices by the KCB Bank Group in violation of his fundamental right to equality and freedom from discrimination as guaranteed in Article 27 of the Constitution and the termination of his employment was unfair, unjustified, illegal, null and void.
Lawyer Kamau further seeks the court to declare that the Non-Compete Clause in the 2016 Contract is unenforceable by the KCB Group as against him and is voidable by him as against the Bank ab initio, byreason of the termination of the Petitioner’s employment having been a violation of Articles 41(1) and 47(1) and (2) of the Constitution, and of the Employment Act.
He also wants the Employment Court to find that finding that KCB’s group legal representation by Messrs of Mohammed Muigai LLP Advocates law firm in respect of his claim for unlawful termination of employment resulted in a clear conflict of interest by reason of the fact that a Founding and Senior Partner at the said firm lawyer Mohammed Nyaoga is also the Chairman of the CBK’s Board of Directors.
“A Declaration that the circumstances of KCB’s legal representation by Messrs. Mohammed Muigai LLP Advocates resulted in a violation of the Petitioner’s fundamental right to have the employment dispute decided independently and impartially, as guaranteed in Article 50(1) of the Constitution,” seeks lawyer Kamau.
Kamau is seeking damages against both KCB Group and Central Bank of Kenya jointly and severally for the violation of his constitutional and fundamental right to fair labour practices.
He wants further wants court to declare that CBK is liable to petitioner on account of its breach of statutory duty to effectively regulate KCB Group to ensure that KCB complied with the Central Bank of Kenya Prudential Guidelines and all other Laws, Rules, Codes and Standards, and that, as an issuer of securities, it complied with capital markets legislation.
Kamau through his lawyer Nderitu told the court that he was involved in Shareholder engagement in introducing the Group aide-mémoire that significantly improved the management of the Annual General Meetings, including obtaining approval without voting through the Memorandum and Articles of Association of Kenya Commercial Bank Limited among others.
He said that during his employment at KCB Bank Kenya and with the KCB Group, he initially worked well with former KCB CEO Joseph Oigara until 2016 when the CEO allegedly started sidelining him by removing the legal function from his reporting line.
He further claims he was transferred from the Group’s offices at Kencom House to its offices Upper Hill under the guise that the Petitioner was merely to support the KCB Group Board.
He adds that at that point his roles were given to Okumu for reasons that were not related to work demands. He stated that Oigara at one time proposed that he should leave his role in the KCB Group and go and serve as the Company Secretary of the National Bank of Kenya Limited, a subsidiary of the Group, a suggestion which he disagreed with to Oigara’s utter annoyance.
Kamau stated that his work was thenceforth unfairly discredited, leading to his being taken through a disciplinary process whose intended outcome failed miserably, and the Petitioner was vindicated.
“More specifically, the Petitioner contends that the purported creation of a new organizational structure towards the end of 2020 was in fact Oigara’s orchestration targeted to remove certain individuals by requiring them to undergo interviews in the pretext that new roles were created, and amounted to a further violation of the Petitioner’s fundamental right to fair labour practices under Article 41(1) of the Constitution,” said in his court documents.
He further adds that this sham reorganization demonstrates how the role of the KCB Group Company Secretary purportedly ceased to be and was then very briefly replaced with a new role of the KCB Group General Counsel. The role of KCB Group Company Secretary then ‘resurfaced’ immediately thereafter, in total violation of legal and regulatory requirements.
News & Analysis
Court of Appeal Upholds Eviction of Radcliffes from Karen Land
The Court of Appeal has stayed the decision of the Environment and Land Court purporting to reinstate Adrian Radcliffe into possession of the 5.7 Acre Karen Land by Kena Properties Ltd after eviction by the lawful owners in February 2022. Adrian Radcliffe who was evicted by Kena Properties Ltd, the innocent purchaser of the Land for value.
Before his eviction, Mr. Radcliffe had been living on the land as a squatter expatriate for 33 years without paying any rent. Since he moved into the property as a tenant, he only paid deposit for the land in August 1989 despite corresponding severally with the owner of the land. His attempt to acquire the land by adverse possession claim filed in 2005 was dismissed by Court in 2011 on the basis that he has engaged with the owner of the land July 1997 and agreed to buy the land which he failed to do. The High Court [Justice Kalpana Rawal as she then was] concluded that:
“His [Mr. Adrian Radcliffe] averments that he did not have any idea of the whereabouts of the Defendant and that he could possibly be not alive, were not only very sad but mala fide in view of the correspondence on record addressed by him to the Defendant’s wife. I would thus find that the averments made by him to the contrary are untrue looking to the facts of this case.”
On 10th March 2022, Mr. Adrian Radcliffe and Family purported to obtain court orders for reinstatement into the land. However, the Court of Appeal issued an interim stay of execution of the said orders. The Court of Appeal has now granted the application of Kena Properties Ltd and stayed the execution of the Environment and Land Court Order pending the hearing and determination of the Appeal.
The Court also stayed the proceedings at the Environment and Land Court on the matter during the pendency of the Appeal. In effect, the eviction orders issued by the Chief Magistrate Court for eviction of Mr. Adrian Radcliffe in favour of Kena Properties as the purchaser of the property for value were upheld and the company now enjoys unfettered ownership and possession of the suit property until the conclusion of the Appeal.
The Court of Appeal in granting the orders sought by Kena Properties Ltd concurred with Kena Properties Ltd that as the property owner it had an arguable appeal with a high probability of success which would be rendered nugatory if Adrian Radcliffe a trespasser was to resume his unlawful possession of the suit property, erect structures thereon, recklessly use or abuse the said suit property as he deems fit. In any case, that is bound to fundamentally alter the state of the suit property and render it unusable by Kena Properties Ltd as the property owner.
At the same time, the Appellate Court rubbished the argument of Adrian Radcliffe in opposition to the application for stay that he has been in occupation of the suit property for more than 30 years and that he and his family were unlawfully evicted from the suit property on 4th February, 2022. The Court also rejected Radcliffe’s claim that Kena Properties Ltd has no valid title to the suit property and held that as the purchaser, the company was entitled to enjoy ownership and possession of their property during the pendency of the appeal.
The Court dismissed claims of Mr. Adrian Radcliffe that Kena Properties Ltd as the property owner acquired title to the suit property illegally and unprocedurally finding to the contrary. Further, it rejected Adrian Radcliffe’s claim that Kena Properties as the purchaser cannot evict a legal occupier of a property putting paid to the claim that he was a legal occupier at the time of eviction.
As a matter of fact, Mr. Adrian Radcliffe cannot claim to be the legal occupier of the property having attempted to acquire it by adverse possession before the High Court thwarted his fraudulent scheme on 28th February 2011. Mr. Radcliffe did not appeal the 2011 High Court decision meaning it is still the law that he is not the owner of the land nor the legal occupier of the land having attempted to adversely acquire against the interests of the lawful owner who sold it to Kena Properties.
Mr. Adrian Radcliffe is a well-to-do Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WaSH) UNICEF consultant and former UN employee (who has been earning hefty House Allowance). Many have wondered why he has been defaulting in paying rent for 33 years on the prime plot of land in Karen while living large and taking his kids to most expensive schools in Kenya. No question, a local Kenyan could never have gotten away with such selfish impunity.
Brief History of the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA)
Kenya Nominates Dr. Kariuki Muigua Member of World’s Premier Arbitral Court
Legal 500 Recognizes Dominic Indokhomi as Leading Individual in Banking and Finance
Chambers Global 2023 Ranks Dr. Kariuki Muigua Among Band 1 Arbitrators Again
Former KCB Company Secretary Sues Over Unlawful Dismissal
CR Advocates LLP is the Kenyan Law Firm to Watch in 2023 after Epic 2022
News & Analysis1 year ago
The Role of NEMA in Pollution Control in Kenya
News & Analysis11 months ago
THE TOP 200 ARBITRATORS IN KENYA 2022
News & Analysis1 year ago
The Definition and Scope of Biodiversity
News & Analysis1 year ago
The Definition, Aspects and Theories of Development
Law Firms2 years ago
Nyaanga & Mugisha Advocates: A Full-Service Boutique Law Firm on the Rise
Law Firms1 year ago
TEMPLARS Advised Lagos Free Zone Company (LFZC) on Development of Integrated Gas Network
Uncategorized1 year ago
Integrating ESG reporting with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
News & Analysis11 months ago
The List of the Top 30 Practicing Arbitrators in Kenya