Survivors of sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) from Kenya’s 2007–2008 post-election turmoil have expressed deep frustration after the Court of Appeal once again failed to deliver a long-awaited ruling on their case.
Friday’s expected judgment was postponed for the second time, prolonging a legal battle that has dragged on for over 12 years. Initially, survivors were told the decision would be issued on April 11, 2025, but following a two-week delay, they have once again been left in limbo.
“For victims who have sought justice for over 17 years, today marks another painful chapter,” said a joint statement released by the organizations supporting the survivors.
These survivors are among the many who endured horrific violence following Kenya’s disputed 2007 presidential election. Their current case arises from Constitutional Petition 122 of 2013, filed by eight survivors—six women and two men—with the backing of several human rights organizations.
Court records reveal harrowing accounts: three women were allegedly gang-raped by police officers, three others attacked by civilian mobs, and two male minors forcibly circumcised by ethnic militias.
In 2020, the High Court awarded Sh4 million in compensation to four survivors, finding that the State had failed to protect them and to investigate abuses committed by law enforcement officers. However, the Court denied compensation to the other four survivors, citing insufficient formal reporting and the fact that civilians, rather than state actors, perpetrated their assaults.
Unwilling to accept a partial victory, the survivors appealed. They argue that the State holds an overarching duty to protect all citizens during times of conflict and should be held accountable for all failures—regardless of whether the perpetrators were government agents or civilians.
The appeal also calls for structural reforms, including the establishment of formal mechanisms to document and compensate all survivors of SGBV stemming from the post-election violence.
Their case has garnered significant support from civil society, including organisations like Utu Wetu Trust, Physicians for Human Rights (PHR), Independent Medico-Legal Unit (IMLU), International Commission of Jurists – Kenya (ICJ-K), Coalition on Violence Against Women (COVAW), Kenya National Commission on Human Rights (KNCHR), Kenya Human Rights Commission (KHRC), and the Constitution and Reform Education Consortium (CRECO). Katiba Institute and REDRESS have also joined as Amicus Curiae, offering legal expertise on broader human rights and constitutional issues.
The Court of Appeal was expected to rule on two key points: whether survivors of civilian attacks during conflict, who were unable to report due to trauma, displacement, or chaos, are still entitled to protection and remedy from the State; and whether the High Court erred by not ordering systemic reforms to identify, document, and compensate all SGBV victims from the crisis.
The repeated postponements have drawn sharp criticism, with rights groups accusing the judicial system of prolonging the survivors’ suffering and delaying the justice they deserve.
“We urge the media and the Kenyan public to question both the judiciary and the government on their treatment of victims of gross human rights violations,” the coalition’s statement urged.
For many survivors, the delay has reopened emotional wounds. Their fight is not just about financial compensation—it’s about recognition, dignity, and the establishment of systems that prevent future injustices.
Advocates argue that without formal state-backed reparations and acknowledgment of all victims, justice will remain elusive. They stress that in volatile and violent situations like the post-election crisis, many survivors are too traumatized or endangered to immediately report assaults, a reality that must be considered by the courts.
With no new date set for the ruling, survivors are left once again in uncertainty, still waiting for the justice they have pursued for nearly two decades.
