African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights v. Republic of Kenya 2017

  • Shravani Gupta
  • Show Author Details
  • Shravani Gupta

    Student at University of Petroleum and Energy Studies, Dehradun, Uttrakhand, India

  • img Download Full Paper


New aspects include the "voluntary perpetuation of cultural identity" and acknowledgment by other groups or the state. It is debatable if the idea of self-identification does not already embrace the concept of cultural distinctiveness. Additionally, it tends to communicate an essentialist view of culture, which underplays the fact that culture is always evolving as a result of both endogenous and exogenous forces. Given the lack of acknowledgment of indigenous rights, it can be difficult to attach much weight to the viewpoint of official institutions, even though the designation of an indigenous community by other communities may be a valid indicator of a group's status. There are still some unanswered issues, such as where to draw the line between indigenous communities, minorities, and peoples. This somewhat reflects the authors' goals when they wrote the African Charter, but it can also be a real challenge for many groups. The scope and effects of FPIC have also not been fully investigated. The concept is still hazy, even if it could be appropriate to separate it from the right to self-determination.


Case Comment


International Journal of Law Management and Humanities, Volume 5, Issue 6, Page 1637 - 1641


Creative Commons

This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution -NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) (, which permits remixing, adapting, and building upon the work for non-commercial use, provided the original work is properly cited.


Copyright © IJLMH 2021