Religious groups petition state to review proposed religious Bill

Civil society organizations and religious rights advocates have called for the constitutional review of the proposed Religious Organizations Bill 2024, warning that some provisions in the Bill could undermine freedom of religion and belief.

Speaking during a Coalition Government Dialogue on Freedom of Religion or Belief (FoRB) forum at a Nairobi hotel, representatives from a consortium led by Search for Common Ground said the proposed bill introduces additional regulatory structures that may not address the root causes of religious abuse and extremism and could undermine Article 32 of the Constitution on freedom of religion and belief.

The consortium, which also includes KESHO Alliance, Muslims for Human Rights (MUHURI) and Kenya Community Support Centre (KECOSCE), warned that some provisions could cause exclusion and duplicate existing laws, therefore undermining freedom of religion and belief in Kenya.

While highlighting the concerns, Executive Director of Muslims for Human Rights (MUHURI) Wallid Kassim said the legislation risks excluding marginalized religious communities and, at the same time, imposing restrictive regulations on faith groups.

“The proposed law could create exclusion by favoring certain religious groups while sidelining others, particularly African traditional belief systems and minority faiths,” Kassim warned.

Within Christianity, the Executive Director said the representation is limited to selected groupings such as the Catholic Church, the Evangelical Alliance of Kenya, and the National Council of Churches of Kenya, therefore excluding other significant faith expressions and denominations.

Kassim indicated that the framework further appears to exclude indigenous and minority belief systems, including African Traditional Religions, Kaya elders, Rastafarian communities, and other traditional spiritual structures that form part of Kenya’s cultural and religious heritage.

The group argued that the proposed establishment of a Religious Organizations Commission, a recommended Presidential Taskforce to prevent religious extremism and exploitation following the 2023 Shakahola tragedy, would duplicate the mandate already implemented by the Registrar of Societies.

“The Office of the Registrar of Societies under the Office of the Attorney General is already mandated and institutionally equipped to undertake registration and administrative functions relating to societies, including religious organizations,” reads parts of the recommendation.

They recommended the Office of the Registrar of Societies be strengthened to avoid duplication of mandates and cut public expenditure.

They further argued that Kenya already has sufficient laws to address issues such as money laundering, terrorism, child protection and misuse of religion, adding that the focus should instead be on strengthening enforcement of existing laws.

Another teething issue raised by the group is that the proposed registration requirements for religious institutions, including mandatory academic qualifications and recommendation letters from umbrella religious organizations, risk creating unnecessary and disproportionate barriers to the enjoyment of freedom of religion or belief as protected under Article 32 of the Constitution.

“The proposed qualification requirements may unintentionally discriminate against certain faith traditions whose systems of spiritual leadership and knowledge transmission are not based on formal theological certification or institutional academic structures,” the group hinted.

They added that indigenous and traditional belief systems often rely on intergenerational knowledge transfer, mentorship, and customary practices rather than formal diplomas or degrees.

Kassim said the requirement for recommendation or endorsement from umbrella bodies may indirectly compel religious institutions to affiliate with specific umbrella organizations as a precondition for recognition, thereby undermining the voluntary nature of religious association and autonomy.

This he said may further create gatekeeping structures that disadvantage smaller, independent, emerging, or minority faith communities,” reads part of the document.

Stakeholders recommended that membership in umbrella religious organizations should remain voluntary and not a mandatory requirement for registration and that registration requirements should respect the diversity of religious traditions and leadership structures in Kenya, including indigenous and traditional belief systems.

They further urged that the proposed Bill avoid rigid academic qualification standards that may unintentionally discriminate against certain faith communities and called for any registration framework to be guided by principles of inclusivity, proportionality, non-discrimination, and protection of freedom of religion or belief.

The forum heard that the requirement to possess theology degrees unfairly favors mainstream religions with established academic systems while discriminating against traditional and informal belief systems.

Stakeholders proposed a rotational leadership structure within the commission and equal representation for Christians, Muslims, Hindus and African traditional believers to ensure inclusivity.

The consortium further said offences in the Bill, including extremism, hate speech, coercion, public safety and other criminal conduct, are already covered under existing laws such as the Penal Code, the Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA), the National Cohesion and Integration Act (NCIC Act) and other criminal and administrative frameworks.

They warned that the Bill risks duplication of mandates, overlapping jurisdictions and uncertainty in enforcement among state agencies.

Stakeholders recommended that criminal offences and enforcement provisions already adequately covered under existing laws be removed from the Bill to avoid duplication and legislative overlap.

“Priority should be given to strengthening existing institutions, accountability mechanisms, and implementation capacities rather than creating parallel regulatory and enforcement structures,” reads part of the proposal.

Participants said the legislation appears to be heavily influenced by past tragedies involving faith-based groups, including the Shakahola massacre; religious extremism; and terrorist attacks linked to extremist ideologies but fails to include measures to protect and support victims, compensation, or rehabilitation.

They noted that families affected by the Shakahola tragedy continue to suffer, with many victims yet to receive justice or psychosocial assistance.

“The proposed framework places greater emphasis on regulation, registration, and enforcement structures than on the protection, support, and rehabilitation of victims and affected communities,” reads part of the document.

They argued that the Policy and Bill lack clear provisions and mechanisms for the protection and support of persons affected by religiously motivated harm, abuse, exploitation, intolerance, coercion, violence, or related violations.

“We recommend that the Bill and Policy incorporate comprehensive victim protection and support mechanisms, including reporting and referral pathways, psychosocial and legal support services, safeguarding procedures for children and vulnerable persons, and rehabilitation and reintegration measures where necessary,” they recommend.

They argued that the framework should also provide for accountability measures where state agencies fail to respond appropriately to credible reports, complaints, or early warning indicators relating to harmful religious practices or religiously motivated violence.

They argued that the bill fails to clarify how its provisions would relate to other legal frameworks, creating confusion over enforcement responsibilities between the proposed commission and existing state agencies.

Stakeholders also highlighted the lack of clear and precise definitions in the Bill, particularly on terms such as “religious extremism,” “radicalization,” “coercion,” and “harmful religious practices.”

They warned that vague wording could open room for subjective interpretation, selective enforcement, and potential misuse of the law against religious groups.

“The absence of clear definitions creates risks of arbitrary application, selective enforcement, and confusion regarding the scope of prohibited conduct,” stakeholders warned.

The group said many Kenyans are not conversant with the proposed bill despite its progress through Parliament and called on the government to review it to ensure worship spaces are protected.

by Ian Chepkuto