Setting the record straight in socio-economic rights adjudication: The Mitu-Bell Welfare Society Supreme Court of Kenya judgment

Abstract

A leading criticism of the Mitu-Bell Welfare Society decision in the Supreme Court of Kenya is that it fell short of achieving the transformative effects expected similar to South Africa’s Irene Grootboom. One such critique has been provided by Ian Mwiti Mathenge in his paper which this article responds to by asserting that the Court addressed relevant issues to Kenya’s jurisprudential needs. Specifically, the Court clearly affirmed evictees’ rights to seek redress, including compensation, adequate notice, dignified treatment and even the provision of alternative land for resettlement. The analysis of the case also acknowledges the Court’s interpretation on the place of international law in Kenya, and areas for future research and development.