Empowering individuals, organizations and community settings through;
1. Enabling healthy collective - intra-extra-personal integrations Pride in all levels natural cultural social groups; tribe, regional continental,
2. Government; ethical and Rule of law governance culture
3. Human faced health care System,
4. Liberating, conscious and conscience raising education
5. Innovating and self-fam
ily-Nation Empowering glocal Business models
6. Community-faith based values lifestyle
Legal Framework
Our new constitution begins “We the people of Kenya…” Acknowledge God’s Supremacy, Honour our Heroes, Proud of our identity and diversity, Respect our heritage, Commit to the Well-being of one and all, Recognize Dreams and Aspirations of all Kenyans, Exercising our God given Sovereignty, Adopt and Enact Our own made laws and we commend these to Gracious blessing of God . My interest is to start a revolution for Africa’s renaissance for Africa to shape itself according to our own believes, culture value and systems without continuing fall prey to other people systems and believing they are better than us and ours. Therefore, their systems, Identity, believes, thoughts are best for us and we must go by their will, identity and appetite while we hate , look down on ourselves, our identity and our systems because we have been brain washed enough to think ourselves inferior compared to some other peoples way of life. Let us start somewhere:
International law
Our constitution includes obligation to obey international law. But let ask ourselves fundamental questions regarding law and justice
Justice is action in accordance with the requirements of some law. Whether these rules be grounded in human consensus or societal norms, they are supposed to ensure that all members of society receive fair treatment. Issues of justice arise in several different spheres and play a significant role in causing, perpetuating, and addressing conflict. Just institutions tend to instill a sense of stability, well-being, and satisfaction among society members, while perceived injustice can lead to dissatisfaction, rebellion, or revolution. Each of the different spheres expresses the principles of justice and fairness in its own way, resulting in different types and concepts of justice: distributive, procedural, retributive, and restorative. These types of justice have important implications for socio-economic, political, civil, and criminal justice both at the national and international level. Distributive justices or economic justice, is concerned with giving all members of society a "fair share" of the benefits and resources available. However, while everyone might agree that wealth should be distributed fairly, there is much disagreement about what counts as a "fair share." Some possible criteria of distribution are equity, equality, and need. (Equity means that one's rewards should be equal to one's contributions to a society, while "equality" means that everyone gets the same amount, regardless of their input. Distribution on the basis of need means that people who need more will get more, while people who need less will get less.) Fair allocation of resources, or distributive justice, is crucial to the stability of a society and the well-being of its members. When issues of distributive justice are inadequately addressed and the item to be distributed is highly valued, intractable conflicts frequently result. This is the essence of the conflicts playing out across Europe and in United States politics in 2012-2013--over taxes, deficits, "austerity programs," jobs, rights of labor, etc. but even in a different way and more shap is conflict in Africa based on deferential development outcomes based haves and have not. When looked in context of understanding justice as fairness the the following principles are important to apply and apply in context
a. Deserts, Equity, Equality, and Need The principles of equity, equality, and need are most relevant in the context of distributive justice, but might play a role in a variety of social justice issues.[4] These principles all appeal to the notion of desert, the idea that fair treatment is a matter of giving people what they deserve. In general, people deserve to be rewarded for their effort and productivity, punished for their transgressions, treated as equal persons, and have their basic needs met. However, because these principles may come into conflict, it is often difficult to achieve all of these goals simultaneously. According to the principle of equity, a fair economic system is one that distributes goods to individuals in proportion to their input. While input typically comes in the form of productivity, ability or talent might also play a role. People who produce more or better products...either by working harder, or by being more talented, this argument goes, should be paid more for their efforts than should people who produce less. Note that this sort of distribution may not succeed in meeting the needs of all members of society. In addition, the idea that justice requires the unequal treatment of unequals is in tension with the principle of equality. This principle of egalitarianism suggests that the fairest allocation is one that distributes benefits and burdens equally among all parties. I would like to hear you take thoughts in this particular in distributing the world burdens equally across the ocean in which International law has been applied in institutions such as WTO, UN, International financial Institutions, ICC, the burden of justice for international crime has fallen on African leaders and non from USA and Europe even after attacking nations out of self interest and falsehood. That is why ICC is not a place to seek any justice for Africa at all and its time Afric as a continent withdrew its membership en-mass
ii. Procedural justice is concerned with making and implementing decisions according to fair processes that ensure "fair treatment." Rules must be impartially followed and consistently applied in order to generate an unbiased decision. Those carrying out the procedures should be neutral, and those directly affected by the decisions should have some voice or
Representation in the decision-making process which brings us to justice demand for public participation. If people believe procedures to be fair, they will be more likely to accept outcomes, even ones that they do not like. Implementing fair procedures is central to many dispute resolution procedures, including negotiation, mediation, arbitration, and adjudication. This is where I ma seriously always been concerned about the making of the international law. By international law hereby referred to as (IL) are those rules of conduct that are binding on international actors in relations, transactions and problems that transcend national frontiers. For Example, the ICC Rome statutes IL, Can we as a country, Kenya, or indeed as African continent claim to have had a good deal of procedural justice in the development, implementation and fairly treated in the international process of making ICC as IL? It is on this basis I am on the side of a complete new procedure and process of developing implementing International law. We start from our end and ask that the rest of the nations come with their concepts process and produce fairly well participated in document to govern our cases regionally at the continental levels and that way we meet the rest of the nations half way, rather than presented with readymade always regulation and outcomes. In relation to procural Justice and conceptualizing justice as fairness these principles should apply and be seen to apply equally;
a. Impartiality, Consistency, Standing, and Trust- Principles of justice and fairness are also central to procedural, retributive, and restorative justice. Such principles are supposed to ensure procedures that generate unbiased, consistent, and reliable decisions. Here the focus is on carrying out set rules in a fair manner so that a just outcome might be reached. Fair procedures are central to the legitimacy of decisions reached and individuals' acceptance of those decisions. To ensure fair procedures, both in the context of legal proceedings, as well as in negotiation and mediation, the third party carrying out those procedures must be impartial. This means they must make an honest, unbiased decision based on appropriate information. For example, judges should be impartial, and facilitators should not exhibit any prejudice that gives one party unfair advantages. The rules themselves should also be impartial so that they do not favor some people over others from the outset. An unbiased, universally applied procedure, whether it serves to distribute wealth or deliver decisions, can ensure impartiality as well as consistency. The principle of consistency proposes that "the distinction of some versus others should reflect genuine aspects of personal identity rather than extraneous features of the differentiating mechanism itself.] In other words, the institutional mechanism in question should treat like cases alike and ensure a level playing field for all parties. Retributive justice appeals to the notion of "just desert" -- the idea that people deserve to be treated in the same way they treat others. It is a retroactive approach that justifies punishment as a response to past injustice or wrongdoing. The central idea is that the offender has gained unfair advantages through his or her behavior, and that punishment will set this imbalance straight. In other words, those who do not play by the rules should be brought to justice and deserve to suffer penalties for their transgressions. The notion of deterrence also plays in here: the hope is that the punishment for committing a crime is large enough that people will not engage in illegal activities because the risk of punishment is too high. In addition to local, state, and national justice systems, retributive justice also plays a central role in international legal proceedings, responding to violations of international law, human rights, and war crimes. Similarly, these IL do not incorporate relevant African ways of retribution, which in themselves spell more punishment that western imprisonment system. So the probability that risk of imprisonment for international crime as well as local crimes are not deterrents at all to African population is there as compared to possible community based process (procedural justices) and consequently community banishment (retributive justice) informed by African traditions and culture just as the present laws in informed by Western imprisonment tradition and concepts. Restorative justice The first thing that the betrayed person may seek from the betrayer is some form of restitution, putting things back as they should be. The simplest form of restitution is a straightforward apology. Restoration means putting things back as they were, so it may include some act of contrition to demonstrate one is truly sorry. This may include action and even extra payment to the offended party. Restorative justice is also known as corrective justice. Following this type of justice, African continent has been exploited so much that the development and riches of the West are explained by the stolen wealth of African continent. The wealthy here is not just physical resources, it also involves human resources slavery is white western world receiving African labor without paying even cent for it. (clarify book by Walter, Rodney; How Europe under developed Africa ) not that the book creates the African wealth but documents the untold exploitation of African trade to point of impoverishing African that had no reason for any import from anywhere, we were a self sufficient continent. Over years of exploitation in every sense we left impoverished and dependent on west both materially development wise and in our brains. Commutative Justice; the virtue that regulates those actions which involve the rights between one individual and another individual. If a person steals another's money, he or she violates commutative justice. Any violation of commutative justice imposes on the guilty party the duty of restitution, that is, the duty of repairing the harm caused. In fact, strictly speaking, only violations of commutative justice give rise to this duty of restitution. NB;
However, because there is a tendency to slip from retributive justice to an emphasis on revenge, some suggest that restorative justice processes are more effective. While a retributive justice approach conceives of transgressions as crimes against the state or nation, restorative justice focuses on violations as crimes against individuals. It is concerned with healing victims' wounds, restoring offenders to law-abiding lives, and repairing harm done to interpersonal relationships and the community that is why in my opinion ICC process and outcome cannot by any means be of use to Kenyan’s crimes and victims as well as entire nation. Victims (individuals, community, and national citizens) take an active role in directing the exchange that takes place, as well as defining the responsibilities and obligations of offenders. Offenders are encouraged to understand the harm they have caused their victims and take responsibility for it. Restorative justice aims to strengthen the community and prevent similar harms from happening in the future. At the national level, such processes are often carried out through victim-offender mediation programs, while at the international level restorative justice is often a matter of instituting truth and reconciliation commissions. If you have been wronged, consider carefully what kind of justice you are really seeking. If you are the wrong-doer and others are seeking justice against you, seek first to ensure distributive justice. A question may be asked why people are put in prison. If it is to prevent them re-offending, then it is restorative justice. If it is to punish them, then it is retributive justice. Sadly, over and over again this has proven a poor method of prevention.
