Hope and doubt in state compensation plan

Listening to the State House speeches and reading the KNCHR Reparations Framework, I agree with transitional justice expert Tina Alai’s observation. While the moment is significant, it is not yet historic. What clarity does it offer  victims and a nation traumatised by state violence and what must the State do next?

Led by the Presidents of the Republic and the Supreme Court, both Parliamentary Speakers and other senior State Officers, the speeches were coherent, eloquent and grounded in transitional justice principles. They acknowledged the irrecoupable harm to thousands, affirmed the practical promise of reparations, positioned KNCHR as the Presidency’s key advisory body, and reiterated the need for accountability and non-recurrence.

With a recent Sh 9 billion budget cut and no new significant resources, it is a miracle the Commission has managed to develop a reparations framework and verify 1,101 victims for compensation in two months. Their report is commendable. Grounded in constitutional and international principles of victim‑centred reparations, justice, and non‑recurrence, it adopts a “reasonable basis to believe” standard and establishes a clear legal and institutional pathway. Its emphasis on investigations and prosecutions aligns with demands by the Coalition of Victims and Survivors Against State Violence.

Twenty-two per cent of those verified include families of 245 Kenyans killed by police officers paid by our taxes. The remaining 78 per cent include survivors of physical assault, severe injury, torture, arbitrary detention, sexual violence, enforced disappearances, property loss and other crimes. The report sets minimum compensations levels for six categories of violations. They range from Sh 2.5 million for fatalities, Sh 2 million for torture and sexual violence to Sh 100,000 for loss of business. Indicative calculations suggest that minimum, moderate and high scenarios would require Sh 1.03 billion, Sh 2.1 billion and Sh 3 billion respectively.

Standardised minimum figures risk under-compensation. Individual awards should reflect actual harm, long-term disability and lost earnings. There appears to be no provision for psychosocial trauma, ongoing medical care, or assistive technology. How will property loss be valued? Will payments be adjusted for delays or will those violated in 2017 receive the same as those abused in 2025? Will there be adjustments for persons with disabilities, elderly persons, minors and other vulnerable groups. Will there be another round for the 793 claimants who remain unverified?

To safeguard against the corruption seen in the Internally Displaced Persons programme post 2008, payments should be overseen by  KNCHR and audited by the Auditor-General. The proposal for National Reparations Act, Policy and a ring-fenced Fund managed by an independent institution and overseen by the KNCHR, must be established quickly. Cases against officers and their commanders must be expedited. Charges against protesters and human rights defenders for lawfully exercising their rights under Article 37 should be withdrawn. A formal Presidential apology and a guarantee of non-repetition in front of victims’ families and survivors is overdue. MPs must prioritise the passing of a Reparations Act and the overhaul of the Public Order Act.

The promise to roll out payments next week will be the first test of the State’s sincerity especially as the Sh 2 billion lapses with the 2025/26 budget. The next will be how the Interior Ministry and Police handle upcoming Finance Bill and June 2024 anniversary demonstrations. With at least 23 people killed protesting the fuel price hike (20), Ebola medical base (2) and 2 Multi-Media University students seriously injured in the last 21 days, curbing abusive police officers who often resemble hired goons, will take more than words.

All eyes must remain on the DCI, IPOA, and ODPP to see whether cases against officers accelerate. With over 150 protest related killings since June 2024, incomplete files, delays, unprotected witnesses and lost evidence are unacceptable. So too, are all those peaceful protesters still facing high bail terms and endless hearings.

We can pause to recognise this hard‑won victory for survivors, victims’ families, and all of us who have demanded reparations. However, reparations must not substitute prosecutions, disciplinary action, and institutional reform. Only then, will this moment be truly historic.