- The three-judge bench astutely emphasised that life sentences contradict the fundamental objective of conviction, which is to rehabilitate offenders.
- Confining someone for the entirety of their life denies them the opportunity for personal growth, transformation and societal reintegration.
Image: FILE
In a historic ruling, the Court of Appeal has declared life imprisonment unconstitutional, igniting a crucial dialogue about the principles and purposes of sentencing in Kenya.
This landmark decision, witnessed in the case of Julius Kitsao Manyeso versus the Republic, urges us to reevaluate the fairness and effectiveness of a punishment that sentences individuals to spend their entire lives behind bars. It is imperative for our justice system to evolve and embrace a progressive approach that aligns with the goals of rehabilitation, equity and human rights.
The esteemed three-judge bench astutely emphasised that life sentences contradict the fundamental objective of conviction, which is to rehabilitate offenders. Confining someone for the entirety of their life denies them the opportunity for personal growth, transformation and societal reintegration.
By abolishing the death penalty while retaining life imprisonment, we unintentionally perpetuate a system where both punishments yield similar outcomes. This disparity not only lacks fairness but also undermines the very essence of our justice system.
It is crucial to recognise that life imprisonment, as we know it, stems from the colonial penal code, failing to reflect the diverse cultural and societal values of our nation.
Historically, African communities perceived punishment as a means to restore harmony, fostering reconciliation rather than eternal condemnation of an individual. Embracing our own cultural perspectives on justice will encourage a holistic and restorative approach to sentencing that takes into account the potential for growth and redemption.
Following global trends, numerous countries have acknowledged the necessity to redefine life imprisonment. They have taken strides to specify fixed terms, ensuring clarity and proportionality in sentencing. This approach facilitates meaningful assessments of rehabilitation, incentivises positive behaviour, and instills hope for individuals to rebuild their lives.
By following suit, Kenya can align itself with nations that prioritise fairness, proportionality and the potential for rehabilitation within their criminal justice systems.
The declaration by the appellate court represents a significant stride toward a more progressive and just judicial system in Kenya. By acknowledging that the aim of conviction is rehabilitation rather than condemnation, we open doors to more humane and effective sentencing methods.
Let us seize this opportunity to redefine life imprisonment, considering our cultural values, international precedents and the principles of fairness and proportionality. It is time to forge ahead, ensuring that our justice system not only serves punitive interests but also provides avenues for redemption and successful societal reintegration.
In conclusion, the decision represents a significant step toward a more progressive and just judicial system in Kenya. By acknowledging that the aim of conviction is to rehabilitate rather than condemn, we open the door to more humane and effective methods of sentencing.
Let us embrace this opportunity to redefine life imprisonment, taking into account our cultural values, international precedents and the principles of fairness and proportionality. It is time to move forward, ensuring that our justice system serves not only the interests of punishment but also the potential for redemption and reintegration into society.
Senior programme officer at Article 19 Eastern Africa