(Nairobi, Kenya)— Kenya’s Supreme Court heard final arguments today in a landmark case that could determine the extent of the state’s obligation to provide reparations and effective remedies to survivors of election-related sexual violence. Eight survivor-petitioners of the country’s 2007-08 post-election violence were joined in the case by four civil society organizations: the Coalition on Violence Against Women, Physicians for Human Rights-Kenya, the International Commission of Jurists-Kenya, and the Independent Medico-Legal Unit.
The five-judge bench, led by Chief Justice Martha K. Koome and including Justices Smokin Wanjala, Isaac Lenaola, William Ouko, and Mohamed A. Warsame, heard arguments in Supreme Court Petition No. SCPT/E041/2025: Coalition on Violence Against Women & 11 Others v. State Law Office, Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions & 3 Others.
The appeal asks the Supreme Court to determine whether, in the face of a known and foreseeable risk of widespread election violence and sexual violence, the state adopted reasonable, coordinated, and proportionate measures to prevent, protect, investigate, prosecute, and repair the violations that occurred. Under Kenya’s constitutional ‘due diligence’ obligation, the state is required to prevent, investigate, and remedy sexual violence, a responsibility affirmed by Kenya’s Court of Appeal. At its core, the appeal asks whether the state’s constitutional ‘due diligence’ obligation should depend on who carried out the violation or whether a survivor was able to file a police report, particularly during the relevant period, which was defined by insecurity, trauma, and distrust of the police, making reporting difficult.
“For nearly two decades, these survivors have carried the weight of horrific violence that the state was supposed to prevent and that it never fully accounted for. Compensation matters, but so does the principle behind it: that an individual’s right to protection and redress cannot depend on whether their attacker wore a uniform,” said Suzanne Kidenda, Acting Head of Office, Physicians for Human Rights-Kenya.
The petitioners are seeking monetary compensation for the four survivor-petitioners at the center of this appeal; access to medical and psychological rehabilitation for all eight survivor-petitioners; a public acknowledgment and apology from the state; and a Supreme Court declaration clarifying the scope of the state’s due diligence obligations in sexual violence cases going forward. For the petitioners, the Supreme Court is the last avenue for redress within Kenya’s legal system.
“As Kenya heads toward another election, this case is a test of whether the state has actually absorbed the lessons learned from 2007-08, or whether survivors of another crisis, should there be one, will be obliged to fight the same battle for justice once again,” said Kidenda.
The Supreme Court reserved judgment and will deliver its decision on notice. Under the Supreme Court Rules, judgments are ordinarily delivered within 90 days of the hearing, meaning a decision is expected by late October 2026.
For further information, or to set up an interview with the petitioners’ lawyers, contact: Suzanne Kidenda, Acting Head of Office, Physicians for Human Rights-Kenya, skidenda@phr.org
Read a joint statement here from the consortium of partners who have worked together for years to advance this case.
Physicians for Human Rights-Kenya is a registered organization in Kenya, with its office based in Nairobi, and works to strengthen justice, accountability, and survivor-centered responses to human rights violations through medico-legal capacity development, strategic litigation, research, and advocacy. Learn more here.
Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) is a New York-based advocacy organization that uses science and medicine to prevent mass atrocities and severe human rights violations. Learn more here.