Placing Kenya on the global platform: an evaluation of the legal framework

International Journal of Humanities and Social Science. Vol. 1 No. 6; June2011This paper examines the efficacy of the arbitral law and ADR of Kenya. It postulates that while various reasons may be advanced to justify the poor utilization of the arbitral and ADR processes, the fact that from its inception in 1914, the legal framework disregarded local dispute resolution mechanisms is discernible as the main exposition. Second, domestication of international conventions has not engendered arbitration since it was adopted without the necessary policy framework, modifications or adaptation of the law to local circumstances. The Arbitration Act 1968 illuminates this postulation succinctly. The existing legal framework is oblivious to ADR mechanisms, is replete with omissions and encapsulates no decipherable policy. In a nutshell, the legal regime can neither enhance nor endear arbitration or ADR. There is a compelling case for comprehensive reforms and revision of the Arbitration Act, 1995.This paper examines the efficacy of the arbitral law and ADR of Kenya. It postulates that while various reasons may be advanced to justify the poor utilization of the arbitral and ADR processes, the fact that from its inception in 1914, the legal framework disregarded local dispute resolution mechanisms is discernible as the main exposition. Second, domestication of international conventions has not engendered arbitration since it was adopted without the necessary policy framework, modifications or adaptation of the law to local circumstances. The Arbitration Act 1968 illuminates this postulation succinctly. The existing legal framework is oblivious to ADR mechanisms, is replete with omissions and encapsulates no decipherable policy. In a nutshell, the legal regime can neither enhance nor endear arbitration or ADR. There is a compelling case for comprehensive reforms and revision of the Arbitration Act, 1995