Browsing by Author "Mouitui, Charles Otuke"

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Open Access
    Domestic Implementation of the Cartgena Protocol in Kenya and South Africa: A comparative analysis
    (2014-07-30) Mouitui, Charles Otuke
    This comparative study sought to answer the following key research question: to what extent are current and proposed biosafety legislations in Kenya and South Africa consistent with or at variance with key provisions of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (the Protocol)? The specific objectives of the study were: to provide an overview of international and African regional approaches to regulation of modern biotechnology; to establish the extent to which such legislation is consistent with or at variance with key provisions of the Protocol, and to assess whether the above legislations are relevant and workable domestically. The study utilized the comparative study methodology. Analysis was guided by a conceptual framework which captured variance and consistency of the Kenyan Biosafety Bill 2005 on one hand and the Genetically Modified Organisms Act together with the Genetically Modified Organisms Amendment Bill 2005 on the other hand as against the Protocol. The study noted that whereas Legal regulation of modern biotechnology is a complex and a sensitive issue globally, translating science into the normative language of law is itself a complex process. The intricacies of legal regulation are exacerbated by the competing and quite often, irreconcilable socio-economic, cultural, ethical and political imperatives that affect biosafety legislation. Biosafety legislation in Africa is at its infancy yet attempts to establish and maintain a balance; grapples with the above competing imperatives thereby raising political questions that leave African states (Kenya and South Africa included) caught up in the genetically modified organisms (GMOs) cold war. In essence, modern biotechnology raises and leaves more questions than can be answered. The findings of this thesis are threefold: the Protocol is itself inadequate; variance significantly outweighs consistency in attempts to comply with the Protocol by Kenya and South Africa, and establishing relevant and workable biosafety legislations in the two countries is problematic and unforeseeable in the near future if not mired in controversy.