Abstract

Secession remains an emotive, divisive and nebulous subject within the realms of public international law. This is because it pools together two diametrically opposed notions of the right to self-determination and state sovereignty and territorial integrity. On one hand, the right to self-determination is perceived as inalienable since the people have the liberty to break away from a repressive regime and form their own country. In contradistinction, the sovereignty of state is a sacrosanct model that holds the state together and any notion of secession poses an existential threat to the territorial integrity and political stability of a country. On a more abstract level this paper attempts to underscore the legal position of secession in Kenya. More specifically, it expounds on the various underlying reasons behind the simmering support for self-determination across the country. In the same vein, it expounds whether this concept is conceivable in light of the current constitutional dispensation and prevailing judicial decisions. Furthermore, it encompasses a comprehensive comparative study of other judicial forums with a more specific reference to the futuristic advisory opinion by ICJ on the Republic of Kosovo. Thereafter, it suggests a possible model that would befit the Kenyan situation when dealing with this concept.