Amnesty International Kogruppen Zentral-Ostafrika

Impressum | Login

Kogruppen Zentral-Ostafrika

StartseiteKenia AI News

KENIA

AI News

5.10.2015: PRESS RELEASE Kenya: Authorities must keep promise to compensate victims of forced eviction

  • Highway authority “regrets” carrying out unlawful evictions
  • International funders contravened own policies
  • Specific law prohibiting forced evictions needed

In a welcome U-turn, Kenya’s highway authority (KENHA) has admitted that it was wrong to forcibly evict more than one hundred people from an informal settlement and promised full redress to all those affected, said Amnesty International on the eve of World Habitat Day.

The authority acknowledged the wrongdoing in the run up to the publication of Amnesty International’s highly critical report published today.

Driven out for development: Forced evictions in Mombasa details the impact of a road expansion development on the informal settlements of Jomvu and Bangladesh. It also exposes the failure by three of the project’s funders - the African Development Bank, the European Investment Bank and the German Development Bank (KfW) - to comply with their responsibilities.

“This admission by the authorities that the demolitions in Jomvu were forced evictions is a significant victory for the community, but it will only be meaningful if KENHA provides swift and effective remedy to those who lost their homes and livelihoods,” said Justus Nyangaya, Country Director for Amnesty International Kenya.

“As the highway project progresses, there are crucial lessons to be learned. Communities affected must not be subject to further violations. KENHA cannot ignore safeguards to prevent forced evictions and international funders have to ensure adequate human rights due diligence is carried out.”

In particular, Amnesty International’s report focuses on a forced eviction carried out by KENHA on 17 May 2015.

“They have finished us – destroyed everything we had” At around 11pm on the night of 17 May, bulldozers and police moved into Jomvu while most residents slept and began demolishing scores of homes and business structures. Residents had not been meaningfully consulted or given adequate notice and few had time to salvage belongings from their homes before the demolitions began.

Saidi Juma a 38-year-old described how the bulldozer destroyed his home and grocery store. “Around 30 houses were demolished. It took around three or four hours. We did manage to save school uniforms, books etcetera but my six-year-old daughter got hurt in the commotion – her leg was cut by the tin sheets that had been taken down.”

Isaac Masungo a 23-year-old man with physical disabilities awoke to the sound of the demolition. Unable to run to safety, he was still indoors as the bulldozer demolished the front rooms of the building in which he lived. Whilst he managed to get out with the help of neighbours, he was unable to salvage his belongings.

The demolition stopped at 4am. As the bulldozer left, residents were told to demolish their own homes and shops as the demolition would resume the following night. Desperate to preserve valuable building material for reuse, many people tore down their homes and shops themselves.

The forced eviction in Jomvu created a climate of fear and uncertainty in the adjacent Bangladesh informal settlement. Residents there were told by KENHA that they will be evicted but they do not know where, or even if, they will be relocated.

Even though Amnesty International brought the forced evictions to the notice of the European Investment Bank, at a time when KENHA had not taken any steps to provide the victims with effective remedies, the bank’s board approved funding for the project.

Admission of wrongdoing and commitment to make amends Despite their initial determined refusal to take responsibility for the demolitions, KENHA admitted to carrying out the forced evictions almost three months after the incident in a public meeting in Mombasa.

At a consultation meeting with the project’s funders on 17 September, KENHA agreed to compensate those forcibly evicted in Jomvu and also promised to refrain from carrying out forced evictions anywhere in the project area. The authority has also committed to making amends for the forced eviction in a letter to Amnesty International sent on 28 September.

The project's funders told Amnesty International that funding would only be released after KENHA provided effective remedies to residents of Jomvu and updated the resettlement action plan for the entire project area in compliance with the safeguards policies of the banks.

“It is crucial that KENHA keeps its promise and compensates all victims of the forced eviction, including those who dismantled their own homes in fear that they would be bulldozed,” said Justus Nyangaya. “Forced evictions are illegal and we hope that this incident will set an important precedent. Kenyan authorities must learn from this and ensure that forced evictions, so common in Kenya, become a thing of the past. This case demonstrates how communities that organise and act collectively can challenge injustices and claim their rights.”

Background

The report is based on research conducted by Amnesty International in Mombasa in June, July and August 2015. Researchers visited two informal settlements and interviewed 110 women and men affected by the highway expansion project

The highway expansion - the Mombasa-Mariakani Road Dualling Project (MMRDP) - involves expanding the width of the existing highway by 60 metres and will impact homes, businesses and farms along the 41.7 kilometre stretch. The project will be implemented over five years – from 2015 to 2020.

KENHA had issued eviction notices to Jomvu residents in January and painted large yellow crosses marking their homes and businesses for demolition. However, the authority had not taken any steps to consult with the affected people, tell them about the timeline for the eviction, its process or any compensation or resettlement measures available to them.

In a meeting with Amnesty International on 23 September KENHA representatives expressed regret for the forced evictions in Jomvu and as a part of the remedial measures, explained that they intended to conduct a census of all those forcibly evicted, including those who demolished their own properties, and involve the National Lands Commission in preparing a specific resettlement action plan to remedy the forced eviction.


Eilaktion (Urgent Action)

Bitte setzen Sie sich mit Ihrer Unterschrift für die Bewohner der Deep Sea Community ein:

https://www.amnesty.de/urgent-action/ua-153-2015/drohende-zwangsraeumung

Tausende Bewohner_innen der informellen Siedlung Deep Sea in Nairobi sind unmittelbar von Zwangsräumung bedroht. Sie haben von der Straßenbaubehörde KURA die Anordnung erhalten, bis zum 8. Juli ihre Häuser zu räumen. Etwa 3.000 Bewohner_innen der informellen Siedlung Deep Sea in Nairobi droht unmittelbar die rechtswidrige Zwangsräumung. Grund ist ein Straßenbauprojekt der kenianischen Straßenbaubehörde (Kenya Urban Roads Authority - KURA) namens Missing Link, welches von der Europäischen Union und der kenianischen Regierung finanziert wird. Die Anwohner_innen wenden sich weder gegen den Bau der Straße, noch weigern sie sich umzuziehen. Sie fordern lediglich von KURA, ihr Recht auf angemessenes Wohnen zu respektieren und dafür zu sorgen, dass die Räumung internationalen Menschenrechtsstandards entspricht. KURA hat die Bewohner_innen nicht in angemessener Form hinsichtlich alternativer Unterbringung konsultiert. Stattdessen hat die Straßenbaubehörde den Betroffenen eine nicht angemessene "Entschädigung" in Aussicht gestellt. Bei einer Räumung würden die Bewohner_innen, die auf dem für den Straßenbau ausgewiesenen Gelände ein Geschäft betreiben, und solche, die in den angrenzenden Gemeinden arbeiten, möglicherweise ihrer Lebensgrundlage beraubt. Auch die Schulbildung von 300 Kindern, die in der Siedlung leben, würde beeinträchtigt werden. Zudem sollen fünf der acht Sanitäreinrichtungen der Gemeinschaft in Mitleidenschaft gezogen werden. Die Bewohner_innen von Deep Sea haben den Versuch unternommen, eine einstweilige Verfügung gegen die Zwangsräumung zu erwirken, dies wurde jedoch von der zuständigen Abteilung des Hohen Gerichts abgewiesen. Am 7. Juli trafen sich Vertreter_innen von Amnesty International mit Angehörigen der Straßenbaubehörde KURA, um den Bedenken um fehlende Verfahrensgarantieren erneut Ausdruck zu verleihen. KURA sicherte daraufhin zu, sich mit Vertreter_innen der Siedlung zu treffen. Dieses Treffen fand am 8. Juli statt. KURA soll von den Bewohner_innen als Voraussetzung für jedwede Verhandlungen verlangt haben, ihren Antrag vor Gericht zurückzuziehen. Die Straßenbaubehörde erklärte zudem, dass die Frist zur Räumung der Häuser am 8. Juli auslaufe und die Behörde nach wie vor beabsichtige, die Räumung vorzunehmen. Amnesty International würde die Zwangsräumung als rechtswidrig betrachten, wenn die Bedenken der Organisation und der Bewohner_innen von Deep Sea um fehlende Verfahrensgarantieren nicht ausgeräumt werden. Rechtswidrige Zwangsräumungen verletzen die Menschenrechte der Betroffen, so z. B. die Rechte auf Wohnen, Wasser, Sanitärversorgung, Bildung und Gesundheit.

Hier finden Sie einen Blog zum Thema (in englischer Sprache):

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2015/07/the-missing-link/


Pressemitteilungen:

16. April 2015

Crisis looms for Somali refugees as Kenya orders closure of Dadaab refugee camp

Forcibly returning around 350,000 refugees to Somalia would be a violation of Kenya’s obligations under international law and put hundreds of thousands of lives at risk, Amnesty International said today. Dadaab, the world’s largest refugee camp, is situated in the north east of Kenya. It is about 100 km from Garissa, where 147 people, including 142 students, were murdered at the university on 2 April in an attack for which the militant Islamist group, Al-Shabaab, claimed responsibility. The move to close the camps has been presented as a security measure in response to that attack. “The attack in Garissa underlined the need for the Kenyan government to better guarantee the security of its population. But this must not be done by putting at risk people Kenya is duty-bound to protect,” said Muthoni Wanyeki, Amnesty International’s Regional Director for East Africa, the Horn and the Great Lakes. On 11 April, Deputy President William Ruto said the government had told the United Nations High Commission for Refugees that it must close Dadaab refugee camp within three months and return its residents to Somalia, otherwise Kenya would ‘relocate them ourselves.’ The Government of Somalia does not have effective control over many parts of south and central Somalia. Generalised violence and insecurity persists and residents have frequently been subject to both indiscriminate and targeted attacks. If refugees are sent back to these areas, they risk human rights abuses, such as rape and killings, as well as extortion. While it is unclear who is responsible for attacks on civilians in all circumstances, it is believed all parties to the conflict carry out such attacks. Under international law, states are prohibited from forcibly returning people to a place where they would be at real risk of human rights violations. This is known as the principle of non-refoulement. Kenya is a party to the 1951 Refugee Convention and the 1969 Organisation of African Unity Refugee Convention. Refugees are also protected under the Kenya Refugee Act 2006 from forcible return to countries where their safety is not guaranteed and they may face persecution. The Deputy President’s announcement comes against the backdrop of ongoing harassment of Somali and other refugees by the Kenyan security services. Last year, the Somali community was scapegoated and many of its members subjected to human rights violations during Operation Usalama Watch, a security operation that began in April 2014 following two attacks by unknown perpetrators the previous month. Thousands of people were arrested, harassed and ill-treated, had money extorted, or were rounded up and forced into the refugee camps. Hundreds of people were forcibly sent back to Somalia. Amnesty International is not aware of a single Somali arrested during the operation who was charged with terrorism-related offences. This is not the first time that plans to return refugees to Somalia have been discussed. In November 2013, a tripartite agreement was signed between the Governments of Kenya and Somalia, and UNHCR, setting out a framework for the voluntary return of refugees to Somalia. The pilot phase began in December 2014. For refugee returns to be lawful, they must be genuinely voluntary – without undue pressure and with returnees’ safety and dignity guaranteed. Amnesty International has found the ongoing harassment and ill-treatment of Somali refugees by the Kenyan security services has led many to consider returning to Somalia. When people feel they have no option other than to return, this is not a voluntary choice and can amount to forced return. Amnesty International urges the Kenyan government to abide by its obligations under national and international law, and to ensure protection for Somali refugees and asylum-seekers in Dadaab and elsewhere in the country as it has generously done for decades.

Background: The Dadaab Refugee Camp was established in 1991 and hosts over 350,000 refugees and asylum-seekers, mostly from Somalia, but also Ethiopia, Sudan, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Eritrea, South Sudan and Burundi amongst others.

For more Amnesty International reporting and resources on the situation of Somali refugees in Kenya, please see: Somalis are scapegoats in Kenya’s counter-terror crackdown, 27 May 2014: https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/AFR52/003/2014/en/ No Place Like Home: returns and relocations of Somalia’s displaced, 19 February 2014: https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/AFR52/001/2014/en/ Kenya’s decision to confine refugees and asylum-seekers in camps is unlawful, 20 December 2012: https://www.amnesty.org/articles/news/2012/12/outrage-kenya-confines-refugees-and-asylum-seekers-camps/

IDefineMe (an exhibition exploring Somali refugees’ identity and experiences in Kenya): https://www.amnesty.org/en/articles/news/2015/03/i-define-me/


13.April 2015

Kenya: Ensure Due Process on ‘Terrorism List’

The Kenyan government should urgently review the inclusion of human rights organizations on an official list of alleged supporters of terrorism and ensure full respect of due process, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch said today.

The list is comprised of 86 individuals and entities, and includes two human rights groups, Muslims for Human Rights (MUHURI) and Haki Africa. The list was published in the official government gazette on April 7, 2015, days after the attack on Garissa University College in northeastern Kenya in which 147 people, including 142 students, were killed. The militant Islamist group, Al-Shabaab, claimed responsibility for the attack.

“The Kenyan government list raises many questions as well as serious concerns that Haki Africa and MUHURI are being targeted for their important work documenting human rights violations committed by the security forces,” said Leslie Lefkow, deputy Africa director at Human Rights Watch. “Kenyan authorities should ensure due process for all persons and entities included in the list and guarantee that human rights organizations are not targeted for their legitimate work.”

Haki Africa and MUHURI are highly respected groups that have focused on documenting human rights violations by the Kenyan security forces, including in the course of counterterrorism efforts. In November 2013, MUHURI and the Open Society Justice Initiative published a report that documented extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances of terrorism suspects and Muslim clerics in coastal areas by the Anti-Terrorism Police Unit. The then-executive director of MUHURI, Hussein Khaled, received credible threats to his life soon after the report was released.

The publication of the list raises serious concerns for due process, including proper time and opportunity to contest the designation and the right to be informed. The directors of Haki Africa and MUHURI told Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch they received no official communication and only heard about the order against their organizations through the media. The gazette notice gave listed entities and individuals one day’s notice to demonstrate the authorities “why it should not be declared as a specified entity.”

Being declared a “specified entity” has wider implications beyond bank account freezes. Under the Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA) of 2012, “specified entities” are equated with “terrorist groups.” Membership in a terrorist group is punishable by up to 30 years’ imprisonment.

Kenya’s government should urgently reconsider the listing of Haki Africa and MUHURI and ensure that human rights defenders and organizations can perform their work effectively and without fear of reprisals.

According to international standards regarding counter-terrorism measures, governments should ensure a transparent listing and de-listing process, based on clear criteria, with an appropriate, explicit and uniformly applied standard of evidence, as well as an effective, accessible and independent mechanism of review for the individuals and entities concerned.

The Prevention of Terrorism Act does not provide a mechanism for appealing the decision of the committee, which may violate both the Kenyan constitution and international law. Article 47 of Kenya’s 2010 constitution provides for fair administrative action that is expeditious, efficient, lawful, reasonable and procedurally fair. International law prohibits the imposition of government sanctions without adequate due process.

“This order places the burden of proof on the accused with almost no notice or opportunity to appeal, in direct contravention of Kenyan and international standards,” said Muthoni Wanyeki, regional director for East Africa at Amnesty International. “States have a duty to protect their population from violent attacks, but must ensure that all anti-terrorism measures are implemented in accordance with international human rights and humanitarian law.”

Immediately after the list was published, the Central Bank of Kenya instructed banks to freeze the accounts of those listed, including the human rights organizations. The POTA, which the sanctions are based on, prohibits the organizations from receiving new funding from any other source.

The act’s provisions also allow the cabinet secretary, either on his or her own motion or at the request of a new committee known as the Counter Financing of Terrorism Inter-Ministerial Committee, to “make an order freezing the property or funds of a designated entity, whether held directly or indirectly by the entity or by a person acting on behalf of or at the direction of the entity.”

The act requires that listed organizations and individuals are informed of the reasons for the decision. Both organizations learned of the listing through the media and confirmed that when tried to go to the bank to withdraw funds they were told that they had received a directive from the Central Bank of Kenya that their accounts were restricted.

Haki Africa and MUHURI announced on April 10 that they will challenge in court the listing and freezing of their bank accounts.

Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch are concerned the listing of Haki Africa and MUHURI may represent broader hostility towards civil society by the administration of President Uhuru Kenyatta, which has had difficult relations with human rights groups since coming to power two years ago.

Human rights organizations inside and outside Kenya have expressed concerns about efforts by the ruling Jubilee coalition to restrict civil society space and curtail the work of human rights groups. The Jubilee manifesto proposed limiting foreign funding for nongovernmental organizations, and a law proposing such a cap, as well as other restrictive amendments, was defeated in parliament in December 2013. There are concerns that the government may attempt to reintroduce the measures.


2. March 2015

Kenya: University attack highlights security failures

This morning’s horrific attack on a Kenyan university college by masked gunmen highlights the urgent need for the protection of students, college staff and other ordinary people in Garissa and other areas in the north of the country, said Amnesty International today. The organisation is also calling for the authorities to conduct a prompt, impartial and effective investigation to bring the perpetrators to justice.

Garissa University College, a constituent college of Moi University, is located in northern Kenya, a part of the country known to be vulnerable to Al Shabaab attacks. “We urge the Government of Kenya to act decisively and within the Constitution and the law to ensure protection for those under or at risk of attack in Garissa and other areas of the north,” said Muthoni Wanyeki, Amnesty International’s Regional Director for East Africa, the Horn and the Great Lakes.

“Citizens and public servants in the north have repeatedly expressed fears about their vulnerability to Al Shabaab attacks which the Kenyan government has failed to appropriately address. Learning institutions are meant to be safe places for students and their teachers. Their protection must be fully guaranteed.”

According to the Kenya Red Cross, so far, the attack has resulted in 65 casualties including an unspecified number of students and residents. Five casualties have been airlifted to Nairobi for treatment. Additional people are believed to be missing and are presumed kidnapped.

Both the local and International media have reported the armed group Al Shabaab claimed responsibility for the attack.

Amnesty International emphasises the Kenyan government’s responsibility to guarantee the human rights of all its citizens within the boundaries of the Constitution and the law. “It is the government’s responsibility to guarantee the security of all its citizens, including those in the north—and to do everything legally in their power to prevent such attacks from taking place at all.”


5.Dezember 2014

Kenya: Justice for victims of post-election violence still an urgent priority

Justice for victims of the 2007-2008 post-election violence is still an urgent priority, said Amnesty International, following today’s move by the Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court to withdraw charges of crimes against humanity against Kenya’s Uhuru Kenyatta.

“Thousands died in the post-election violence in Kenya and this development throws a stark light on the continuing impunity for those who committed these serious crimes. Victims of these crimes are still waiting for justice and closure,” said Muthoni Wanyeki, Amnesty International’s Regional Director for East Africa, the Horn and the Great Lakes.

“The withdrawal of the charges is not a vindication of President Uhuru Kenyatta, rather it is an indictment of the government of Kenya and the International Criminal Court, both of which continue to fail the victims of the post-election violence by denying them the justice they rightfully deserve.

“It is a travesty that the government of Kenya has failed to ensure justice is done at the national level.”

The door is open for renewed charges to be brought against Uhuru Kenyatta at a later date if sufficient evidence is obtained. The ICC also retains jurisdiction, and Amnesty International urges it to investigate others who may be responsible for crimes during the post-election violence.

“The prosecution must draw lessons from this process and its investigative failures,” said Muthoni Wanyeki.

“Six years on, the victims are still crying for justice. The government of Kenya’s lack of cooperation with the Office of the Prosecutor is deplorable and today’s ruling will not deter us from supporting them in their pursuit of that goal.”

In July this year, Amnesty International released a report titled; Crying for Justice – Victims’ perspectives on justice for the post-elections violence in Kenya. The report lambasted the government’s continued failure to properly investigate crimes committed during the 2007-2008 post-election violence and to provide justice and reparation for its victims. It extensively depicted the devastating impact of the violence on the lives and livelihoods of the victims.

The violence claimed more than 1,100 lives, left 660,000 homeless and thousands more suffering with lasting injuries.


2.April 2014

MIT DER UNSICHERHEIT FERTIG WERDEN, DIE UNS ALLE BEDROHT

Von Justus Nyang'aya, Direktor von Amnesty International Kenia

Ich bin nur deshalb noch am Leben, weil meinen Angreifern die Kugeln ausgingen. Ich erinnere mich sehr gut an jenen Abend, den 17. Dezember 2013. Das Erstaunen im Blick des Schützen, nachdem er sich auf ein Knie niedergelassen hatte und ein letztes Mal die Waffe auf mich richtete und nichts geschah, als er den Abzug zog. Obwohl ich schon dreimal getroffen worden war - in die Brust, die linke Hand und das rechte Bein - gelang es mir, den Schützen und seine vier Komplizen auf Abstand zu halten, indem ich Teller, Gläser und alles, was mir sonst noch in die Hände fiel, nach ihnen warf. Das Chaos und die Blutlachen in meiner Küche waren Zeugnis des stattgefundenen Kampfes. Als sie die Flucht ergriffen, blieb ich mit den drei Schusswunden und mehreren Brüchen in der Hand zurück. Mit Hilfe meiner Frau und einiger guter Samariter schaffte ich es schließlich in ein Nairobier Krankenhaus und wurde wieder ganz gesund. Gott sei Dank überlebte ich. Meine Frau und zwei meiner Kinder, die sich während dieses traumatischen Vorfalls im Haus versteckt hielten, entkamen unverletzt, und die Angreifer erbeuteten lediglich etwas Geld und Wertgegenstände. Doch das durchdringende Gefühl von Unsicherheit und Hilflosigkeit ist niederschmetternd. Wir sind zuhause überhaupt nicht sicher. Wir sind auf den Straßen nicht sicher. Wohin können wir uns wenden, um sicher zu sein? Diese Gedanken, die während meiner Genesung im Krankenhaus in meinem Kopf widerhallten, haben Millionen von KenianerInnen jeden Tag. Das Unsicherheitsgefühl nimmt mit der enormen Menge an Kleinwaffen und Munition zu, die unkontrolliert nach Kenia kommt. In den vergangenen Jahren sind in Kenia Tausende Menschen durch Waffengewalt zu Tode gekommen. Und obwohl die meisten Schützen und Opfer KenianerInnen sind, stammen die Waffen in der großen Mehrheit nicht aus Kenia. Die Waffen und die Munition, die das Leben so vieler KenianerInnen beenden oder zerstören, werden in Europa, China und anderswo hergestellt. Nicht registrierte Waffen fließen in unser Land über ein sehr komplexes weltweites Waffenhandelssystem, das bislang fast gar nicht reguliert ist. Sie strömen aus den Nachbarländern nach Kenia, nachdem sie durch viele Hände gegangen sind - von HerstellerInnen, HändlerInnen und MaklerInnen über Transportfirmen zu zahlreichen ominösen Kunden, kriminellen Banden und bewaffneten Gruppierungen. Dieses Szenario wiederholt sich in zahllosen Ländern in der ganzen Welt, die von Waffengewalt gebeutelt sind. Jedes Jahr werden mehr als eine halbe Millionen Menschen auf der ganzen Welt durch den kaum kontrollierten Waffenhandel mit Waffengewalt getötet. Viele weitere Millionen Menschen werden verletzt, vertrieben, vergewaltigt oder erleiden andere schwerwiegende Menschenrechtsverletzungen. Doch so muss es nicht bleiben. In der Nacht ehe ich angeschossen wurde, hatte ich ironischerweise bei der Kenianischen Gesellschaft für Recht über die Lösung zu diesem Problem gesprochen. In der Rede berichtete ich über Schritte, die ich in Kenia und im Ausland Hunderte Male beschrieben habe. Genau vor einem Jahr, am 2. April 2013 verabschiedete die internationale Gemeinschaft schließlich einen Waffenhandelsvertrag zur Kontrolle des 75-Milliarden-US-Dollar schweren internationalen Waffen- und Munitionshandels. Mehr als drei Viertel der Länder dieser Welt unterstützten bei der UN-Generalversammlung in New York den Abschluss des Vertrags. Es war ein hart erkämpfter Sieg nach zwei Jahrzehnten intensiver Kampagnenarbeit durch Amnesty International und andere NGOs. Ich gehörte zu einer kleinen Delegation der Zivilgesellschaft, die in den letzten angespannten Verhandlungswochen bei der UN vor Ort war. Es war ein Augenblick großen Stolzes, als wir den Vertrag bekamen. Ich war stolz darauf, was meine KollegInnen und eine kleine Gruppe von Regierungen auf der Weltbühne hatten erreichen können. Und ich war auch auf mein Land stolz, das daran beteiligt gewesen war, dies möglich zu machen. Schließlich war Kenia eins der ersten Länder, die öffentlich ihre Unterstützung für den Waffenkontrollvertrag erklärt hatten und gehörte zu einer Handvoll Staaten, die die Eingangsresolution der UN im Jahr 2006 mit verfasst hatten. Diese Resolution setzte die diplomatischen Gespräche in Gang und war Teil mehrerer weiterer Resolutionen der Generalsversammlung in dem Prozess, der schließlich zum Waffenkontrollvertrag führte. Doch dieser Stolz hat sich in Frustration und Verzweiflung verwandelt, ähnlich der Hilflosigkeit, als die Angreifer mein Haus stürmten. Die kenianische Politik hat zwar der Welt mit zu einem Waffenkontrollvertrag verholfen, drückt sich jetzt aber vor ihren Verpflichtungen. Tatsächlich hat Kenia seit dem 3. Juni 2013, seitdem der Vertrag zur Unterzeichnung bereit liegt, vor der UN nichts weiter unternommen, um den Vertrag zu unterstützen - Kenia gehört nicht einmal zu den 118 Staaten, die ihn unterzeichnet, geschweige denn zu den 13 Ländern, die ihn ratifiziert haben. Und was mich noch mehr besorgt, Kenia ist damit nicht allein. 43 der insgesamt 155 Staaten, die dem Waffenkontrollabkommen grünes Licht gegeben hatten, drücken sich seither vor ihrer Pflicht, ihn in Kraft zu setzen. Die meisten dieser Länder befinden sich im Globalen Süden, in Gegenden, die von großer Waffengewalt, manchmal brutaler Unterdrückung der Menschenrechte und allzu häufig von bewaffneten Konflikten heimgesucht werden. Der Waffenkontrollvertrag erlangt erst Rechtsverbindlichkeit, wenn ihn 50 Staaten ratifiziert haben. Kenia sollte den Weg anführen und hat nur allzu gute Gründe, ihn zu unterzeichnen und zu ratifizieren. Das Land sollte eine führende Rolle spielen, da die Unsicherheit unsere Häuser und Straßen dominiert. Kenia sollte anderen afrikanischen Staaten und Ländern in der ganzen Welt, die unter hoher Waffengewalt, Menschenrechtsverletzungen und durch Gewehrläufe verübte Kriegsverbrechen leiden, ein Beispiel geben. Wenn es der internationalen Gemeinschaft nicht gelingt, den internationalen Waffenhandel streng zu kontrollieren, sind unser Leben und unsere Lebensgrundlage in Gefahr. Geschichten wie meine und die weiterer der Hunderttausenden anderen Überlebenden bewaffneter Gewalt, weisen auf die realen und gegenwärtigen Gefahren der internationalen Verbreitung von Kleinwaffen hin. Die Behörden in Kenia und anderen Ländern müssen viel tun, um mit den täglichen Auswirkungen dieser Verbreitung umzugehen, um die Kriminalität zu begrenzen und die Sicherheit der Menschen zu stärken. Doch wenn es uns nicht gelingt, eine strenge Kontrolle des Waffenhandels zu erwirken, werden Millionen Menschen weiter leiden. Es ist von entscheidender Bedeutung, dass Kenia seiner Verpflichtung nachkommt, den Fluss von Waffen in die Hände von MenschenrechtsverletzerInnen zu unterbinden, wo immer es möglich ist - die kenianische Regierung muss den Waffenkontrollvertrag unverzüglich unterzeichnen, ratifizieren und mit seiner Umsetzung beginnen. Jetzt ist es an Ihnen, Herr Präsident!

Kenia