Laikipia MPs call for review of Kenya-UK defence deal over accountability concerns

Laikipia Members of Parliament have called for the revision of Kenya’s Defence Cooperation Agreement (DCA) with the United Kingdom, citing concerns over jurisdiction, accountability and compensation for victims of alleged abuses involving British troops.

The MPs said the agreement, signed in 2021, should not proceed to ratification in its current form, arguing that it must guarantee the application of Kenyan law to British military personnel operating in the country.

Their position comes after a petition submitted to Parliament on August 12 by victims and their representatives, who called for a halt to the defence arrangement until outstanding cases involving alleged sexual violence, abandoned children and unresolved deaths are addressed.

The DCA remains unratified, with Parliamentary scrutiny exposing disagreements over which country should exercise jurisdiction when British soldiers are accused of committing serious offences in Kenya.

Laikipia Women Representative Jane Kagiri, whose constituency hosts the British Army Training Unit Kenya (BATUK), said the central issue was whether British soldiers accused of crimes in Kenya should face Kenyan courts or British military courts.

“Kenyans deserve fair and financial reparations from the UK government. There should be no compromise about that,” she said.

The petition raised allegations of rape and sexual assault, deaths involving unexploded ordnance, environmental destruction and mistreatment of Kenyan employees.

Petitioners also alleged that British soldiers had fathered hundreds of children and subsequently abandoned them without support.

Kagiri said any agreement granting foreign troops immunity from prosecution for criminal acts committed on Kenyan soil would conflict with Kenya’s constitutional framework.

“Any international agreement, treaty, or Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA) that purports to give foreign troops total immunity for criminal acts on Kenyan soil is inconsistent with the Constitution and is void to the extent of that inconsistency,” she said.

Laikipia East MP Mwangi Kiunjuri said the Parliamentary scrutiny presented an opportunity to address weaknesses in the existing framework.

“Parliamentary scrutiny has raised concerns around jurisdiction, accountability, public participation so as to ensure protection and the welfare of communities living alongside BATUK Operations,” Kiunjuri said.

His Laikipia West counterpart, Stephen Wachira Karani, said future defence agreements should make it clear that Kenyan laws apply to activities conducted within the country.

“A foreign soldier operating in Kenya cannot be more accountable to his government than a Kenyan victim is to the Kenyan justice system,” Wachira said.

The MPs pointed to several incidents involving British military personnel as evidence of the concerns raised by communities around BATUK.

Among them is the 2012 killing of 21-year-old Agnes Wanjiru, whose body was found in a septic tank at a hotel in Nanyuki after she had reportedly spent an evening with British soldiers.

They also cited the 2021 wildfire at Lolldaiga Conservancy, which destroyed more than 12,000 acres and was linked in the script to BATUK personnel.

The MPs further highlighted paternity cases involving British soldiers and Kenyan women. Human rights lawyer Kelvin Kubai is said to have documented nearly 100 such cases, with the High Court in London issuing declarations of parentage in some cases.

The dispute over the DCA was also brought into focus in July after British authorities announced that Exercise Haraka Storm, a military exercise scheduled for September to November, would be moved outside Kenya after the required licences were not issued.

The licences were later granted, five days after the announcement, although the process leading to the reversal was not publicly disclosed.

Kiunjuri said the government should explain what transpired during the five-day period and disclose any conditions agreed upon during consultations between Kenya and the UK.

“Diplomatic consultation between Kenya and Britain is welcome, but the consultations alone don't answer the important questions raised by Parliament and affected communities,” he said.

Kagiri said the decision to issue the licences did not resolve the substantive issues surrounding the DCA.

She described the move as a temporary administrative step intended to maintain bilateral engagement and protect local economic interests, while arguing that questions of jurisdiction, accountability and compensation remained before Parliament.

The MPs maintained that they were not opposed to defence cooperation with Britain but wanted the relationship to respect Kenya’s sovereignty and the rights of its citizens.

“I am not against Britain. I am not against defence cooperation. I am against a system where cooperation comes at the expense of Kenyan sovereignty, transparency and the rights of Kenyan citizens,” Wachira said.

Kiunjuri similarly argued that seeking compensation should not be interpreted as opposition to Britain, but as an attempt to ensure that Kenyan victims have access to remedies when their rights are violated.

The MPs have warned that if Britain is unwilling to accept provisions that provide for accountability under Kenyan law, Kenya should reconsider the framework governing British military activities in the country and explore a broader range of defence partnerships.

“If Britain declines to ratify an understanding or rather stating Kenya insists on accountability and protection of its citizens, then we should not compromise important national interests simply to preserve the appearance of partnership,” Kiunjuri said.

The MPs are calling for the outstanding concerns to be addressed before the DCA is ratified, particularly provisions touching on jurisdiction, accountability, compensation and the protection of communities living alongside BATUK operations.