In a judgment delivered by Justice Nixon Sifuna of the High Court in Murang’a, Kenya, the constitutionality of life imprisonment has been called into question.
The ruling comes as a result of an appeal filed by Justus Ndung’u, who was convicted of incest under the Sexual Offences Act.
The case, which had been ongoing since 2017, was concluded when Justice Sifuna declared that life sentence imposed on Ndung’u was unconstitutional.
He noted that life sentence is not only archaic in the present civilization, but also unreasonable and absurd.
“It is also an in-dignifying sentence, hence violates the right to human dignity, guaranteed under Article 28 of the Kenya Constitution 2010,” he said.
“It is therefore unsupportable irrespective of the logic or whatsoever rationalization of aggravating factors that may be advanced in support.”
Judge Sifuna on Death Sentence
In his ruling, Justice Sifuna likened life imprisonment to a “death sentence” due to its indeterminate nature.
He emphasized that while it may appear to be a finite period of incarceration, in reality, it extends indefinitely, depriving individuals of any hope for eventual release.
The judge articulated that such a sentence not only strips away an individual’s dignity but also effectively erases them from society.
Also Read: JSC Initiates Process of Sacking Judge, Petitions Ruto
“The more one serves it, the more it drifts yonder to beyond the horizons,” Justice Sifuna remarked, highlighting the psychological toll of perpetual imprisonment.
He argued that imposing a sentence without a definite term not only defies modern standards of justice but also violates fundamental human rights, particularly the right to human dignity enshrined in the Kenyan Constitution.
Ndung’u’s appeal centered on the disproportionate nature of the life sentence in comparison to the severity of his crime.
Despite upholding his conviction, Justice Sifuna acknowledged the need for a more proportionate punishment.
Consequently, he set aside the life sentence and substituted it with a term of 10 years imprisonment, effective from the original date of sentencing.
The ruling by Justice Sifuna marks a significant departure from traditional sentencing practices and sets a precedent for future cases involving life imprisonment in Kenya.
By advocating for a more transparent and humane approach to sentencing, Justice Sifuna’s decision points to the evolving understanding of justice within the Kenyan legal system.
Human Rights Vs Criminal Justice
Transitioning from the archaic notion of perpetual incarceration to a more rehabilitative and proportionate model reflects a broader shift towards human rights-based approaches to criminal justice.
Notably, Justice Sifuna emphasizes on the importance of upholding the dignity of all individuals, including those convicted of serious offenses.
Furthermore, the ruling prompts a critical examination of sentencing practices worldwide, encouraging other jurisdictions to reevaluate the effectiveness and fairness of life imprisonment as a punitive measure.
It challenges lawmakers and legal professionals to seek alternatives that prioritize rehabilitation and societal reintegration while still holding individuals accountable for their actions.
Also Read: Ruto Suspends High Court Judge
Earlier this month, Joseph Irungu alias Jowie had been sentenced to death after he was found guilty of the murder of businesswoman Monica Kimani in 2018.
“Based on what I have said, I have ordered that the first accused before this court, Joseph Kuria Irungu alias Jowie, shall suffer death as provided for the offence of murder under section 204 of the penal code of Kenya. That is the order of the court,” read part of the ruling by Justice Nzioka.
Justice Nzioka ruled that the prosecution had adduced adequate evidence and proved beyond reasonable doubt that Jowie indeed killed Monica.
The judgement received mixed reactions from Kenyans and legal experts, citing that the Supreme Court of Kenya had abolished the death sentence charge.
