RA & another v Holy Ghost Coptic Church of Africa & 6 others; National Council for Persons With Disabilities & another (Petition 23 of 2018) [2020] KEHC 9230 (KLR) Case Summary

Court
High Court of Kenya at Kisumu
Category
Civil
Judge(s)
TW Cherere, J
Judgment Date
October 22, 2020
Country
Kenya
Document Type
PDF
Number of Pages
3
Explore the case summary of RA & another v Holy Ghost Coptic Church of Africa & 6 others, highlighting key legal insights from Petition 23 of 2018 [2020] KEHC 9230. A critical examination for legal professionals and scholars.

Case Brief: RA (Acting on Her Own Behalf and on Behalf of SOO) & another v Holy Ghost Coptic Church of Africa & 6 others; National Council for Persons With Disabilities & another (Interested Parties) (Petition 23 of 2018) [2020] KEHC 9230 (KLR) (22 October 2020) (Judgment)

1. Case Information:
- Name of the Case: RA (Acting on Her Own Behalf and on Behalf of SOO) & another v Holy Ghost Coptic Church of Africa & 6 others; National Council for Persons With Disabilities & another (Interested Parties)
- Case Number: Petition 23 of 2018
- Court: High Court at Kisumu
- Date Delivered: 22 October 2020
- Category of Law: Civil
- Judge(s): TW Cherere, J
- Country: Republic of Kenya

2. Questions Presented:
The central legal issues the court must resolve include whether the fundamental rights of SOO were violated by the Respondents, particularly concerning his right to education, freedom of movement, and protection from torture.

3. Facts of the Case:
The case involves two petitioners, RA (the mother) and SOO (her son), against the Holy Ghost Coptic Church of Africa and several other respondents, including individuals and government bodies. SOO, born on September 3, 1999, was a Form 4 student in July 2017 when he was taken to the church for faith healing due to a perceived mental health issue. The petitioners allege that SOO was unlawfully detained in the church, chained, and denied access to education and medical treatment, constituting a violation of his rights. The 1st and 2nd Respondents acknowledge that SOO was in their custody but deny any wrongdoing, claiming there is no evidence of torture.

4. Procedural History:
The case was brought before the High Court as a constitutional petition. The petitioners sought various orders against the respondents, arguing violations of SOO's rights. The respondents included the church, individuals involved in SOO's detention, and government officials. The court heard submissions from both sides, focusing on the alleged violations of constitutional rights and the responsibilities of the respondents.

5. Analysis:
- Rules: The court considered various constitutional provisions, including Articles 2, 10, 19, 28, 39, and 43, which protect rights such as freedom of movement, the right to education, and freedom from torture. The Mental Health Act was also referenced concerning the treatment of individuals with mental health issues.
- Case Law: The court cited previous cases, including *Anarita Karimi Njeru v R (No 1)* and *Mumo Matemu v Trusted Society of Human Rights Alliance*, which emphasize the need for precise claims in constitutional petitions. These cases underscore the importance of articulating specific grievances and the provisions allegedly violated.
- Application: The court found that SOO's rights were violated due to his prolonged detention and the removal from school, which hindered his education and freedom of movement. The detention was deemed a form of psychological torture, violating his rights under the Constitution.

6. Conclusion:
The court ruled in favor of the petitioners, declaring that SOO's constitutional rights were violated. The court ordered the respondents to pay Ksh. 500,000 in damages and costs to the petitioners. This decision underscores the importance of protecting the rights of individuals, particularly minors, and the responsibilities of parents and institutions regarding education and health.

7. Dissent:
There were no dissenting opinions noted in the judgment.

8. Summary:
The case of RA & another v Holy Ghost Coptic Church of Africa highlights significant issues regarding the rights of individuals with mental health conditions, parental responsibilities, and the protection of children's rights in Kenya. The court's ruling reinforces the legal obligation to ensure that minors receive education and are protected from unlawful detention and treatment, setting a precedent for similar cases in the future.

Document Summary

Below is the summary preview of this document.

  • RA--another-v-Holy-Ghost-Coptic-Church-of-Africa--6-others-National-Council-for-Persons-With-Disabilities--another--Petition-23-of-2018-[2020]-KEHC-9230-KLR--Case-Summary_2169_0.jpg

This is the end of the summary preview.

Related Documents

View all summaries