Strathmore Law Journal

Vol. 8 No. 2 Annual Issue

Lyla Latif — Mon, 28 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0300

The global health financing structure carries imprints of colonial-era power dynamics, perpetuating health inequities between the Global North and South. Tracing the historical origins of these inequities, this paper analyses how colonial policies and philosophies shaped early health systems to serve the interests of the European colonisers over indigenous populations in Africa. Consequently, this paper demonstrates how institutionalised racial biases from the colonial period echo in contemporary global health governance. The analysis shows the connections between historic prejudices, economic exploitation, and persisting disparities in the Global South. The author highlights how present-day inequities stem from systemic imbalances in global health financing and governance rooted in colonial mentalities. Furthermore, the author scrutinises how these colonial legacies have influenced global financial institutions and manifested in unequal resource allocation, priorities, and access—widening the global disease burden gap. The author also discusses the emergence of digital health apps and how their financing and data stewardship can risk perpetuating new forms of exploitation reminiscent of colonial extractivism. Therefore, the author argues that rectifying these structural flaws by realigning financing and governance is essential for equitable global health.

Vol. 8 No. 2 Annual Issue

Macharia Kaguru — Mon, 28 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0300

The project of constitutionalising environmental rights is nearly complete with over two-thirds of the United Nations member states having enshrined these rights in their constitutions. Despite the widespread adoption, recent studies on environmental protection indicate that the project has not improved in commensurate terms. Environmental law scholars are now engaged in bridging the ‘implementation gap’. In an attempt to locate the implementation gap problem, this paper analyses the achievements made under the environmental rights constitutionalisation project. Using Kenya and South Africa as case studies, the author finds that while substantial progress has been made, the conceptualisation of the right to a clean and healthy environment has yet to receive a harmonised meaning. The impact, this paper notes, is the differentiated interpretation and application that greatly undermine environmental protection. As a remedy, the author argues that the adoption of a country’s ‘fundamental value[s]’ as the basis of understanding environmental rights not only provides the widest protection but also allows a harmonised application.

Vol. 8 No. 2 Annual Issue

Okech Owiti, Albert Mumma, Kariuki Muigua — Mon, 28 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0300

This paper critiques several fundamental concepts conceived and introduced into the discourse on Alternative Justice Systems (AJS) in Kenya by the Judiciary’s ‘Taskforce on AJS’. To attain this objective, the authors highlight the lack of clarity on the concepts of Access to Justice (A2J), AJS, mechanisms and methods, customs and norms, law
and legal systems, and repugnancy as used by the Taskforce. This paper provides clarity on the concept of A2J as ‘socio-economic justice’, AJS as a ‘justice system’ within the general legal system and serves only as an alternative to a dispute resolution mechanism, ‘mechanisms’ as a broader framework which contains ‘methods’, customs and norms which are not analogous with, and may or may not be part of, the ‘law and legal system’, and the ‘repugnancy clause’, which is innocuous and has no content until applied within a specific space-time. Within the discussion on AJS, the authors also clarify the distinctions among the concepts of ‘legal system’, ‘justice system’ and the ‘judiciary’; ‘state or formal’ and ‘non-state or informal’ institutions and processes; ‘judicial’ and ‘non-judicial’ institutions and processes, and ‘traditional’, ‘community’, ‘customary’, ‘African’ or ‘indigenous’ systems. The paper concludes that the Taskforce’s report applies these concepts in a manner that is confusing or conflated, hence, leading to a conceptual minefield.

Vol. 8 No. 2 Annual Issue

Babafemi Odusi, M. Bukola Odunsi — Mon, 28 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0300

It is trite that the administration of the justice system in Nigeria is confronted by diverse challenges. Among the relatively better-known challenges are delays in the dispensation of justice by the courts, corrupt practices among judicial and law enforcement officers, disrespect of court judgments by the government, its agencies and other subjects, as well as the high cost of litigation. Perhaps one factor that may not be as apparent as other challenges is the jurisprudential ideology of positivism—inherited through the transportation of the British legal system into the country via the colonial relationship with Britain. The underpinning ideology influences and informs the judgments from the courts, which tend to translate to the dispensation of ‘technical’ or legalistic justice in linewith strict constructionist formats. To people traditionally attuned to a concept of justice rooted in the moral perception of fairness or good conscience, the technical nature of the justice emanating from the courts tends to raise questions and concerns as to the justness or equitability of such. Generally, these challenges and the nature of the Nigerian justice system erode the trust and confidence of the populace in the justice system, particularly the poor and less influential class’. Hence, this raises the question of whether Nigerian courts are the last hope of the common man. Against this background, this paper engages the discourse on the ideology, challenges and allied issues relating to the administration of justice in Nigeria.

Vol. 8 No. 2 Annual Issue

Eti Best Herbert, Fasilat Abimbola Olalere, Ademola Ojeyemi Ojekunle — Mon, 28 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0300

Judicial decisions are made based on the evidence presented before the court. In criminal cases, evidence must be overwhelmingly convincing—beyond a reasonable doubt—to secure a conviction of the defendant. When evidence is obtained through flawed processes or is improperly evaluated by the court, it often results in wrongful conviction. Reliance on coerced confessional statements, faulty eyewitness identifications, jailhouse informants, flawed forensic evidence, and improper judicial evaluation of evidence have been identified as major causes of wrongful conviction in Nigeria. This issue is prevalent in Nigeria, and the courts tend to be somewhat lenient regarding these practices. While learning from foreign jurisdictions, it is suggested that Nigerian courts strictly adhere to the provisions of the law on the admission of confessional statements and rigorously evaluate evidence to prevent miscarriages of justice. This would compel law enforcement agents and prosecutorial authorities to focus on intelligence gathering and the proper use of forensic science in criminal investigations, rather than relying heavily on confessional statements. There is also a need for statutory entrenchment of these recommendations.

Vol. 8 No. 2 Annual Issue

Dare Joseph Ayinde — Mon, 28 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0300

This article unpacks the concept of emergency procurement and why it is highly susceptible to corruption. It examines the grounds upon which procuring entities may carry out emergency procurement as stipulated in the Public Procurement Act of 2007 (the PPA), which is the primary legal framework governing public procurement at the federal level of government in Nigeria. The author suggests that the provisions of the PPA should be amended to allow procuring entities to apply competitive negotiation and framework agreements in the award of emergency procurement where appropriate, in addition to the direct procurement method. Furthermore, the author recommends that in line with the provisions of the PPA, all procuring entities that carry out emergency procurement should be mandated to submit comprehensive reports of their procurements to the Bureau of Public Procurement (the Bureau). Similarly, the Bureau should carry out post-emergency audits on such procurement to ascertain the justification for emergency procurement, and whether due process was followed. The Bureau should also take appropriate punitive action against those culpable, where it finds any evidence of corruption.

Vol. 8 No. 2 Editorial

Mukami Wangai — Mon, 28 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0300

Vol. 8 No. 2 Foreword

Macharia Kaguru — Mon, 28 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0300