Stand-Alone Posts

I immensely enjoyed reading Dr. Mbori’s piece in Afronomicslaw titled ‘Hidden in Plain Sight: Kenyan Supreme Court Shooting is own Foot on Merits Review and Appellate Jurisdiction in Continuing Supremacy Battle with the East Africa Court of Justice (EACJ). I now have the pleasure of partially disagreeing with him particularly on whether the EACJ has (merit) review jurisdiction over national laws. This comment is not an attempt at exhaustively analysing the Supreme Court Advisory Opinion in Reference No. E001 of 2022. I found that Advisory Opinion to be surface-level, a bit incoherent and internally inconsistent, and devoid of adequate reasoning. As such, I refrain from commenting on other key issues in the Advisory Opinion. Some of those issues are: how the Court determined that it has jurisdiction to issue the opinion; the relationship between international and municipal law; the Court’s repeated failure to distinguish sources of international law and their interaction with municipal law; the court’s (misplaced) discussion on subsidiarity and margin of appreciation, and the apportionment of interpretation and application functions between the EACJ and domestic courts. Rather, my comment is restricted to the question of whether the EACJ has (merit) review jurisdiction over national laws, which the Supreme Court answered in the negative and which Dr. Mbori answers in the affirmative. I partially disagree with both the Supreme Court and Dr. Mbori, but for different albeit related reasons.

The case filed by Afronomicslaw with Wanjiru Gikonyo as Applicant is brought under Article 30 of the EAC Treaty. Article 30 of the EAC Treaty allows individuals and Non-Government Organizations (NGOs) who are residents of the community to bring cases against partner states of the EAC where these partner states violate the law.

Three years ago, at the heart of the COVID-19 pandemic, I wrote an entry in this blog on the Martha Wangari Karua vs. Attorney General of the Republic of Kenya (Martha Karua case) in the East Africa Court of Justice (EACJ) First instance division titled: The EACJ First Instance Court Decides Martha Karua v Republic of Kenya: The Litmus Test for EACJ Jurisdiction and Supremacy. In that case, the First Instance division found that the Respondent State through the actions of its Judiciary (Supreme Court) had violated its commitment to the fundamental and operational principles of the EAC, specifically the principle of the rule of law guaranteed under Article 6(d) and 7(2) of the EAC Treaty. The court had found that Martha Karua’s right to access justice was violated and it issued a historic award for general damages in the sum of $ 25,000 to the applicant at a simple interest rate of 6% per annum. Since then, I contend that there is a supremacy battle between Kenya’s apex municipal court and the EACJ in two specific arenas. The first was Kenya’s appeal of this decision in the EACJ Appellate division which categorically dismissed the appeal with costs to the Appellant in February of 2022. The second venue for this ongoing conflict is in the Supreme Court of Kenya where Kenya’s Attorney General filed a reference for an advisory opinion reference that many observers saw as the aftermath of the Martha Karua case. This is the long awaited advisory opinion judgement that was issued on 31 May 2024 and forms the basis of this piece.

To this end, we seek contributions from economists, IR scholars, political theo-rists, historians, sociologists and lawyers to explore this important question as well as its theoretical and practical implications. We will explore these and other urgent question in a two-day workshop that will take place on the 5th and 6th of December 2024 at the University of New South Wales (Sydney, Australia). If interested, please send us an abstract of no more than 400 words and a short bio of no more than 50 words by the 1st of July 2024 at dollarandsovereignty@gmail.com. Limited funding may be available for speakers who do not have access to institutional funding.

Interested applicants should submit a brief description of the unpublished/unsubmitted project (up to 800 words) in a Microsoft Word document as well as a CV in PDF by 11:59pm EDT, Monday, July 1, 2024. The Word document description should be single spaced and should not include any identifying information as each submission will be reviewed without attribution.

The Ninth Biennial Global Conference of the Society of International Economic Law (SIEL) will take place on 9-11 July 2025 in Taipei (Taiwan), in collaboration with National Taiwan University (NTU). SIEL’s Ninth Biennial Global Conference will be in person and address the pressures of escalating geopolitical tensions, environmental challenges, unbridled economic nationalism, profound digital transformations, and growing inequalities are reshaping not just economies, but societies globally.

The African Sovereign Debt Justice Network, (AfSDJN), is a coalition of citizens, scholars, civil society actors and church groups committed to exposing the adverse impact of unsustainable levels of African sovereign debt on the lives of ordinary citizens. Convened by Afronomicslaw.org with the support of Open Society for Southern Africa, (OSISA), the AfSDJN's activities are tailored around addressing the threats that sovereign debt poses for economic development, social cohesion and human rights in Africa. It advocates for debt cancellation, rescheduling and restructuring as well as increasing the accountability and responsibility of lenders and African governments about how sovereign debt is procured, spent and repaid.

Interested scholars and practitooners are invited to submit an abstract of about 400 words, in English, French, Portuguese or Arabic, by 25th June 2024 at the latest, at the following email address AfCFTA.HAQAA@obreal.org.