Jumping straight into the fray, I want to get started on one of the more thorny topics - kadhi's courts. The churches have made this one of the stickling issues to their opposition of the draft constitution, so I sought to read the clauses myself and see what all the noise was about. At first glance the sections on Kadhi's courts in the current constitution (s.66) and draft constitution (s.169,170) appear similar. Both give parliament the power to determine how the Kadhi courts will be run Both make the courts subordinate courts. Subordinate courts means that their decisions can be appealed on and overturned by superior courts. Another similarity is that both specifically state that these courts will deal only with matters of a personal nature, to people professing Islam. I have noticed at least one difference. In the proposed constitution, in addition to professing Islam one is also required to submit to the jurisdiction of the court. I'm curious how this works, if
Thoughts from a Kenyan entrepreneur passionate about startups.