Kenyan MPs have rejected claims that the Kenya-UK Defence Cooperation Agreement (DCA) is close to being concluded , insisting that key conditions set by Parliament remain unresolved.
The National Assembly Departmental Committee on Defence, Intelligence and Foreign Relations said the agreement remains in abeyance until the United Kingdom addresses concerns raised during the ratification process, particularly those relating to the British Army Training Unit Kenya (BATUK).
Committee chair Nelson Koech told the National Assembly that Britain had yet to fully address conditions attached to the implementation of the defence agreement.
“The concerns raised by this House regarding BATUK, and the conditions attached to the commencement of the DCA, are yet to be fully addressed by the UK authorities,” Koech said.
MPs Demand Kenyan Jurisdiction Over Murder Cases
One of the main sticking points is Article 6(5) of the agreement, which MPs want amended to expressly place murder cases committed in Kenya under the jurisdiction of Kenyan courts.
Under the existing wording, certain serious offences are excluded from the definition of “official duty”, giving Kenya primary jurisdiction over them. However, murder is not explicitly listed, which MPs argue could create room for disputes over jurisdiction.
Laikipia Woman Representative Jane Kagiri backed the demand, insisting that crimes committed on Kenyan soil should be prosecuted in Kenya.
“We stand and maintain that anybody who commits a crime in Kenya, justice must be delivered here in Kenya,” she said.
Stronger BATUK Community Protections
MPs are also demanding amendments to Article 23 to strengthen BATUK’s corporate social responsibility obligations and protections for communities affected by its operations.
The provision requires BATUK to respect local communities, protect vulnerable groups, compensate for harm where liable and engage affected communities with Kenya’s consent and participation.
Koech said Parliament would not compromise on the outstanding issues, particularly those affecting residents of Laikipia.
“This committee is acting in the best interest of Kenya, more so the people of Laikipia. We have a duty to protect our Constitution as representatives of the people. On this, we will not compromise,” he said.
Progress Made
The committee’s position comes despite assurances from the UK that progress has been made in addressing Kenya’s concerns.
British officials reportedly met Kenyan government officials, MPs and committee members in June to discuss the agreement and provide updates on BATUK’s corporate social responsibility programmes.
The UK said procedures concerning unexploded ordnance had been finalised, environmental and land-use compliance requirements submitted, and measures introduced to prevent sexual exploitation and abuse.
However, Koech maintained that those steps had not resolved the committee’s core concerns.
Several meetings and communications have taken place between the two sides, but the outstanding issues remain unresolved. The committee also attempted to engage the UK Parliamentary Defence Committee directly without success.
BATUK Training Resumes
The disagreement comes even as the Kenyan government recently announced the resumption of joint military training at the BATUK facility in Laikipia.
The committee’s position, however, indicates that the resumption of military activities has not resolved the separate. parliamentary concerns surrounding the defence cooperation agreement.
The current DCA was ratified in 2016 under Article 2 of the Constitution and the Treaty Making and Ratification Act.
A replacement agreement was submitted in September 2021 after the initial five-year term expired, but the 12th Parliament ended before the new agreement could be ratified.
It was subsequently resubmitted to the 13th Parliament in November 2022.
Following public participation, the parliamentary committee recommended that the agreement should only be ratified after amendments are made to Articles 6(5) and 23.
Section 8(9) of the Treaty Making and Ratification Act bars Parliament from approving a treaty whose provisions are contrary to the Constitution.
Kenyan MPs have therefore maintained that the defence agreement must not override Kenyan law, weaken accountability for serious crimes or leave communities affected by BATUK operations without adequate protection.
