Connect with us

News & Analysis

The Meaning and Forms of Environmental Pollution in Kenya

Published

on

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 Publisher of the Year 2021 and CIArb (Kenya) Lifetime Achievement Award 2021.*

Environmental pollution has been defined as ‘the contamination of the physical and biological components of the earth/atmosphere system to such an extent that normal environmental processes are adversely affected’. Environmental Pollution has also been defined as ‘any discharge of material or energy into water, land, or air that causes or may cause acute (short-term) or chronic (long-term) detriment to the Earth’s ecological balance or that lowers the quality of life’. Pollutants strain ecosystems and may reduce or eliminate populations of sensitive species. Contamination may reverberate along the food chain causing mass destruction. An example is the use of herbicides and pesticides in agricultural land.

Some of these chemicals seep into rivers that flow through protected areas, causing poisoning of wildlife which drinks from the river. Another problem is the dumping of solid waste into rivers that flow through protected areas. Solid waste management which is constitutionally delegated to county governments has been a big problem across the country. Pollution has been attributed to many factors which include but not limited to waste by-products emanating from industrialization of our society, the introduction of motorized vehicles, and the explosion of the human population, leading to an exponential growth in the production of goods and services. This is mainly because of the indiscriminate discharge of untreated industrial and domestic wastes into waterways, the spewing of thousands of tons of particulates and airborne gases into the atmosphere, the “throwaway” attitude toward solid wastes, and the use of newly developed chemicals without considering potential consequences has resulted in a lot of environmental disasters throughout the world.

A major cause of pollution in coastal ecosystems is construction of hotels and other facilities in areas that are not on the sewerage lines. Beach resorts and some households in Mombasa have constructed onsite sewage management systems such as septic tanks and soakage pits. However, these often cause groundwater contamination which in turn causes considerable coral reef dieback and threatens the proliferation of marine life. The Wildlife Conservation and Management Act, 2013 deals with pollution by making it an offence to pollute wildlife habitats. The Act applies the polluter pays principle and environmental restoration alongside payment of hefty fines for persons convicted of polluting wildlife habitats.

EMCA has very substantive provisions on pollution of the environment and gives deterrent penalties for violation of those provisions. The courts have further upheld the provisions of EMCA relating to pollution of wildlife resources and one such incidence was in the case of Kwanza Estates LTD v Kenya Wildlife Service, where the court issued an injunction stopping the construction of a public toilet on the beachfront without approval from NEMA holding that the actions had potentially negative effects on the environment. Environmental pollution is a threat to not only the sustainable development agenda but also to the very existence of the humankind. Environmental law thus seeks to control the use of one’s property and human behaviour so as to permit a habitable environment and to minimize adverse ecological effects.

The most common types of pollution perceived in our environment include: water pollution; land pollution; noise pollution; and air pollution. It is estimated that about 30 to 50 per cent of nitrogen applied to soils leaches into rivers and the air, suffocating aquatic life, worsening climate change and shortening lives through contamination. Nutrient pollution, or an excess of nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphorus in the water which enter the rivers as runoff from farmlands and residential areas, can lead to a host of health and environmental problems. Nutrient pollution is attributed to fertilizer, animal manure, sewage treatment plant discharge, detergents, storm water runoff, cars and power plants, failing septic tanks and pet waste.

Nutrient pollution of rivers is considered to be one of the most widespread human impacts on water resources. This is especially more serious in agriculture based economies such as Kenya where most people in rural areas engage in farming using modern chemicals that end up in water bodies. This not only pollutes the water but have a residue effect on the soil thus polluting the soil. Apart from farming chemicals, Sewerage water, industrial wastes and disposals are also sources of water pollution.28 Target 6.3 of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) requires that states should ensure that “by 2030, they improve water quality by reducing pollution, eliminating dumping and minimizing release of hazardous chemicals and materials, halving the proportion of untreated wastewater and substantially increasing recycling and safe reuse globally.

Some scholars have defined the term noise to describe sounds that are disagreeable or unpleasant produced by acoustic waves of random intensities and frequencies. Noise from industry, traffic, homes and recreation can cause annoyance, disturb sleep and effects health. Thus, sound is considered to be a potential serious pollutant and threat to the environmental health. Air pollution can be defined as “the introduction of chemicals, particulate matter, or biological materials that cause harm or discomfort to humans or other living organisms, or cause damage to the natural environment or built environment, into the atmosphere”.  Air pollution is now considered to be a significant public health problem, responsible for a growing range of health effects in many regions of the world.

Indeed, it has been documented that air pollution has overtaken poor sanitation and a lack of drinking water to become the main environmental cause of premature death. Nitrogen oxides, Sulphur dioxide, Carbon Monoxide, Ammonia and Ozone are considered to be the major air pollutants. The United Nations observes that most recorded air pollution-linked deaths occur in developing countries, where laws are weak or not applied, vehicle emission standards are less stringent and coal power stations more prevalent. Kenya’s air condition in most major cities and towns has been rated as some of the most polluted in the world. This is mainly attributed to the unsustainable policies in sectors such as transport, energy, waste management and industry.

It has been argued that while other parts of the world, particularly the developed nations, also have the problem of air pollution mainly caused by burning of hydrocarbons for transport that can be addressed by tackling fuel usage through electric vehicles, and car-free zones, African cities have entirely different problems; pollution is mainly due to the burning of rubbish, cooking with inefficient solid fuel stoves, millions of small diesel electricity generators, cars which have had their catalytic converters removed and petrochemical plants, all pushing pollutants into the air over the cities. According to the World Health Organization, approximately 19,000 people die prematurely in Kenya annually because of air pollution. This is mainly attributed to PM 2.5 annual exposure, which, according to the United Nations, are 70 per cent over the safe level in Nairobi. Kenya has had its own share of air and noise pollution despite the existence of laws meant to curb the same.

*This article is an extract from the Article “Safeguarding the Environment through Effective Pollution Control in Kenya” 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). Dr. Kariuki Muigua is a foremost Environmental Law and Natural Resources Lawyer and Scholar, Sustainable Development Advocate and Conflict Management Expert in Kenya. 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 among the top 5 leading lawyers and dispute resolution experts in Kenya by the Chambers Global Guide 2022.

References

Muigua, K., “Safeguarding the Environment through Effective Pollution Control in Kenya,” Available at: http://kmco.co.ke/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Safeguarding-the-Environ ment-through-Effective-Pollution-Control-in-Kenya-Kariuki-Muigua-28th-SEPT-2019.pdf (accessed 5 May 2022).

News & Analysis

The Roles of the Three Parts of the Permanent Court of Arbitration

Published

on

By

H.E. Amb. Marcin Czepelak, the Fourteenth Secretary-General of the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA)

Continue Reading

News & Analysis

Brief History of the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA)

Published

on

By

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”.

Reference

PCA Website: https://pca-cpa.org/en/about/introduction/history/ (accessed on 25th May 2023).

Continue Reading

News & Analysis

Former KCB Company Secretary Sues Over Unlawful Dismissal

Published

on

By

Former KCB Group Company Secretary Joseph Kamau Kania who has sued the Bank for 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.

Continue Reading

Trending