Mau Mau victims seek compensation

Four Kenyans say they suffered abuse under British colonial rule during the 1950s Mau Mau rebellion Four elderly Kenyans who claim they were variously whipped, beaten, sexually abused and castrated while detained under British colonial rule in the 1950s have brought their claims for compensation to the high court. The survivors of the emergency regime imposed during the Mau Mau rebellion were tortured, forced to confess and, in once case, witnessed the clubbing to death of 11 prison inmates, the court was told. The landmark hearing, expected to last several weeks, will highlight a catalogue of atrocities that will rewrite the history of British colonial rule in Africa. Boxes of documents, stored by the Foreign Office, have been unearthed during research into the claims. They will shed fresh light on the repressive means employed by the authorities to defeat the fight for independence. While not denying that abuses took place, the Foreign Office insists that the UK government retains no residual liability for the claims, deploying a range of constitutional precedents – including reference to the declaration of martial law in Jamaica in 1860 – to block the survivors’ quest for compensation. Robert Jay QC, for the Foreign Office, opened the case with an application that the claims should formally be struck out by the court. Jay told a packed courtroom in London that it did not seek to diminish the appalling acts committed in detention camps between 1952 and 1961 but said the case was “built on inference” and ended in a “cul-de-sac”. The test case claimants, Ndiku Mutua, Paulo Nzili, Wambugu Wa Nyingi and Jane Muthoni Mara, who are in their 70s and 80s, have flown 4,000 miles from their rural homes for the trial, which will also consider whether the claim was brought outside the legal time limit. The judge heard Mutua and Nzili had been castrated, Nyingi was beaten unconscious in an incident in which 11 men were clubbed to death and Mara had been subjected to appalling sexual abuse. Acknowledging their attendance, the judge asked counsel to convey the court’s appreciation of their presence “whatever the results of this case”. The FCO argues that legal responsibility was transferred to the Kenyan republic upon independence in 1963 or else simply ceased to exist. Earlier, the claimants’ solicitor Martyn Day said the case was “not about reopening old wounds”. “It is about individuals who are alive and who have endured terrible suffering because of the policies of a previous British government. “They are now seeking recognition and redress in the form of a carefully conceived welfare fund. It is incumbent on the government to treat such people with the respect and dignity they deserve.” A witness statement by Professor David Anderson, of the African Studies Centre at Oxford University, who has examined some of the withheld documents, refers to forced labour used in many of the camps. It notes a comment by the then attorney general in 1956 that “if we are going to sin, we must sin quietly”. The hearing continues. Kenya Human rights Owen Bowcott guardian.co.uk

Posted by on April 7, 2011. Filed under News, Politics, World News. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.