On March 9, 2023, MP Kaluma submitted an application to the Supreme Court.
He requested the court to halt the orders permitting the NGO Coordination Board (the 1st respondent) to enroll LGBTQ community members.
Additionally, the MP challenged the court’s February 24, 2023 ruling, in which it interpreted the term ‘sex’ in Article 27(4) of the Constitution to encompass ‘sexual orientation of any gender,’ encompassing heterosexual, lesbian, gay, intersex, or other orientations.
Supreme Court Affirms LGBTQ Association Rights And Rejects MP Peter Kaluma’s Challenge
The Supreme Court has rejected an appeal made by Peter Kaluma.
The lawmaker representing Homa Bay Town, in which he contested the rulings of the High Court and the Court of Appeal that permitted the registration of LGBTQ advocacy groups under the NGOs Act.
source: citizentv.s3.amazonaws
The two higher courts reached this conclusion following a unanimous legal interpretation.
Consequently, this defines the term ‘every person’ in Article 36 of the Constitution as encompassing all individuals.
Regardless of their sexual orientation.
Challenging this stance, Kaluma accused the courts of potentially paving the way for the advancement of a pro-LGBTQ+ agenda in the country.
However, in their decision to reject Kaluma’s appeal on Tuesday.
The Supreme Court labeled him unqualified, as he wasn’t originally part of the case.
Furthermore, the Court cited Section 21A for reconsideration, stressing ‘a party.’ Importantly, there was no evidence of fraud against the higher courts.
In their official statement, the Supreme Court stated, “The applicant has not satisfactorily demonstrated that the contested Judgment was the result of fraud or deceit, is invalid.
Moreover, there is no evidence to suggest that the court was misled into issuing its judgment under a mistaken belief that the parties had given their consent.”
Kenyan Archbishop Calls Dismissal of Anti-homosexual Rights Petition ‘Regrettable’
The Chairman of the Kenya Conference of Catholic Bishops expressed deep disappointment with the recent decision by the Supreme Court of Kenya.
source: lh3.googleusercontent
This decision dismissed a petition challenging the court’s earlier ruling on February 24.
Which allowed the registration of LGBTQ+ NGOs in Kenya. Archbishop Martin Kivuva Musonde of the Archdiocese of Mombasa believes that this ruling effectively promotes LGBTQ+ rights in Kenya.
On September 13, Archbishop Kivuva claimed that legalizing implies promotion, linking LGBTQ+ associations’ registration to endorsement.
He questioned Kenya’s stance on LGBTQ+ ideologies, citing talks with presidents who disagreed and implied financial influence.
The February 24 Supreme Court decision endorsed LGBTQ+ association rights despite the country’s ban.
This decision faced opposition from Catholic Bishops in Kenya, who considered it destructive and contrary to the natural order.
Interestingly, two judges, Justice Mohamed Ibrahim and William Ouko, dissented from the majority opinion.
Subsequently, Homa Bay MP George Peter Opondo Kaluma’s March 9 petition contested the February 24 ruling.
It argued that the decision permitted associations promoting illegal homosexual acts and expanded the definition of “sex” in Article 27(4) to include “sexual orientation.”
This Supreme Court ruling concluded a decade-long legal battle .
It was initiated when Eric Gitari, representing the National Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission (NGLHRC), challenged the head of Kenya’s NGO Board for refusing to register an association with the words lesbian or gay in its name.
