'Global jurist of the year': prestige award goes to Kenya’s Justice Mumbi Ngugi

5 February 2021 · Carmel Rickard

One of the most prominent judges in Kenya has been given a major reward in recognition of her work in support of human rights. Judge Mumbi Ngugi, who sits on the anti-corruption and economic crimes division of the high court in Kenya, is also a world advocate for the rights of people with albinism at a time when, in certain parts of the world such as Kenya, people with albinism are targeted and sometimes even killed for ritual purposes. The award to Judge Ngugi is to be made later this month by the Centre for International Human Rights, based at the law school of Northwestern University.

Judge Mumbi Ngugi of Kenya's high court is a ‘role model’ for the law faculty of Northwestern University in the USA as well as for its students, ‘who aspire to be future Justice Ngugis’. That’s according to the Centre for International Human Rights (CIHR) at Northwestern University, the institution that is to award its annual prize to the Kenyan jurist.

Each year, Northwestern Pritzker School of Law’s CIHR makes its ‘global jurist of the year’ award to a sitting judge of a national or international court, who has shown ‘courage in the face of adversity to uphold and defend fundamental human rights or the principles of international criminal justice’.

Judge Ngugi serves in the anti-corruption and economic crimes division of the high court. The CIHR citation for her award notes that she has been involved in Kenya’s emerging human rights jurisprudence, in particular the socio-economic rights guaranteed in the 2010 constitution. She has previously served on the constitutional and human rights division of the high court in Nairobi

Albinism

The judge is a long-time advocate for human rights in Kenya. ‘She has been involved in advocacy work for the rights of women and children, as well as the housing rights of the urban poor.’ But perhaps she is most widely known in Kenya for giving people with albinism a strong voice, being a co-founder of the Albinism Foundation of East Africa, set up in 2008. In a special interview for the UN Office of the High Commissioner she said: ‘We want to ensure the social acceptance of people with albinism.’

Referring to the discrimination against people with albinism, including the fact that many are killed every year for ritual purposes, a practice that still continues in Kenya and elsewhere despite widespread condemnation and being legally outlawed, she commented, ‘It is not fair for people with this condition to die unemployed, uneducated, unaccepted, and maimed or killed for witchcraft rituals.’

Transparency International

Justice Ngugi holds a bachelor of laws degree (LLB) from the University of Nairobi and a master of laws (LLM) in commercial and corporate law from the London School of Economics, University of London.

She received the 2013 International Commission of Jurists-Kenya Jurist of the Year Award, the Brand Kenya Ambassador Award in 2013, the Law Society of Kenya Distinguished Service Award 2017, the C.B. Madan Award 2018 and the Transparency International Judicial Integrity Award 2019.

Violations

Justice Ngugi is also a member of the Africa Regional Judges Forum (ARJF) on HIV-AIDS and chairs the ARJF Steering Committee on Judicial Education.

The CIHR, which is making the award, is attached to the Northwestern law school and has a footprint in many parts of the world. Its main focus is to research and work with emerging human rights issues: this approach gives students an opportunity to engage with people by rights’ violations. An example provided by the CIHR is a week-long immersion experience in Malawi’s detention centres where, among other tasks, students work through the files of prisoners who have been ‘lost in the system’.

The award will be presented during a Zoom-based webinar on Tuesday, 16 February 2021, at which Judge Ngugi will be interviewed by retired US judge, Ann Williams. They will discuss her commitment to human rights, marginalised people, diversity and inclusion among other issues.

Carmel Rickard

About the author

Recent articles by Carmel Rickard

‘No justification for the unjustifiable’: Lesotho’s ombud slams grand-scale torture, assault in Maseru prison

22 March 2024
Carmel Rickard

Lesotho’s national ombud, Tlotliso Angelina Polaki, has issued a scathing report on massive-scale torture and assaults that took place in Maseru’s central correctional institution during December 2023, leaving about 95% of the inmates of the prison injured, one dead and one who is now wheelchair-bound and will never walk again.

Major court decision on image rights benefits Ugandan soccer players

21 March 2024
Carmel Rickard

Members of Uganda’s national soccer team from the period around 2007/8 have just been awarded a payout against MTN Uganda by the commercial court. The telecom giant had a year-long contract with Proline, the players’ originating development soccer club, allowing it to use the players’ images for advertising. But MTN had continued to use their images even after that contract expired on the basis that it had a sponsorship agreement with Fufa, soccer’s governing body in Uganda. The players then challenged MTN in court, through Proline, and have now won a significant damages award. But the judgment exposed some serious flaws in the way that Fufa has approached the question of using the image rights of its senior players, and the court commented that this is a ‘case study’ for why Fufa needs to sort out its contractual arrangements with senior players.

Executive interference in Ugandan court decisions continues – this time by the justice minister

21 March 2024
Carmel Rickard

Uganda’s minister of justice, Norbert Mao, has taken a leaf straight from the book of the country’s president, Yoweri Museveni. This week, the minister wrote to the principal judge of the Ugandan high court, asking that the judge directly intervene in a matter that has been brought to his attention by an MP on behalf of a constituent. Mao asked for the ‘immediate administrative intervention’ in the matter by the principal judge. Earlier this year, Museveni wrote a similar letter to the chief justice of Uganda, also requesting intervention in a matter, and the CJ later indicated that this was not the first time it had happened.

Is rape by family members treated too lightly by the law?

19 March 2024
Carmel Rickard

The high court has sent the case of a Malawian teenager, charged with raping his 89-year-old grandmother, back to the magistrate’s court for a possible re-trial because the court had wrongly prosecuted a case of rape instead of incest. If convicted in a re-trial, however, Malawi’s incest law could see the accused sentenced to a mere five years. Malawi’s penal code provides for a significant difference between the sentence to be imposed when a man rapes a close family member, and in a case where the two are not related. When they are unrelated, the code provides that a rape offender ‘shall be liable to be punished with death or with imprisonment for life’ (However, Malawi has had what amounts to a moratorium on carrying out the death penalty since 1992.) By contrast, ‘incest by males’, is categorised in the code as a ‘felony’, and anyone convicted ‘shall be liable for imprisonment for five years’. There is an exception: if it is proved ‘that the female person is under the age of 16, the offender shall be liable to imprisonment for life’.

Prominent SA advocates lose battle over conviction in Namibian courts for working without a permit, misleading immigration officials

6 March 2024
Carmel Rickard

Two prominent South African advocates have just lost their last hope of squashing their convictions in the Namibian courts. Johannesburg advocates, Mike Hellens SC and Dawie Joubert SC, had been found guilty on two counts, first, working as legal practitioners without an employment permit, and second, giving false or misleading information to immigration officers when they entered the country in 2019. Though they had gone to Namibia to appear in court in a bail application, they told the immigration officials they were there for a ‘visit’ and for a ‘meeting’. Both appealed against their conviction but they had also asked for a judicial review of the decision. In the high court they lost their appeal but won on the review. The outcome in both matters were taken to the apex supreme court for a final word. In December 2023, they lost their appeal at the supreme court. What would that same court say when the state appealed against the review finding? The supreme court has now given its answer: it found the review, that had favoured Hellens and Joubert, was wrongly decided, and set it aside, awarding costs against the two advocates in both the high court and the supreme court.