Court has rules that PAG-K's election ban on women is unconstitutional

Published By Whitney Okore For The Statesman Digital
1 year ago

A provision in the PAG church constitution that prohibits women from running for executive office has been declared unconstitutional.

The three petitioners had challenged various provisions of the PAG-K Church Constitution, particularly a clause prohibiting women from contesting church elections for executive office, claiming that it violated fundamental rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Kenyan Constitution of 2010.

The High Court declared this provision unconstitutional, agreeing with the petitioners' argument that it was discriminatory and violated the Kenyan Constitution's principles of equality and non-discrimination.

The decision means that all members, regardless of gender, can vote equally in the church's leadership elections.

In addition to the ruling, the petitioners brought forth serious allegations against Rev. Patrick Musungu Lihanda, the General Superintendent of PAG-K, accusing him of misappropriating over Kshs 3,000,000 meant for the church.

They demanded his removal from office, citing violations of Chapter Six of the Constitution, which deals with leadership and integrity.

They also claimed that Rev. Lihanda abused his position, resulting in compromised leadership within the church, and demanded a restructuring of the church's leadership to ensure adherence to constitutional principles.

"An order be and is hereby issued to the effect that the Pentecostal Assemblies of God (PAG)-Kenya Church Constitution 1998 be amended within the limits determined by members of PAG K Church within one hundred and twenty (120) days from the date of this decision under the supervision of the registrar of societies" the High court ordered.

The respondents, including Rev. Lihanda, denied all allegations of misappropriation and abuse of office.

They contended that the funds in question were properly used for church activities, and that the petitioners failed to provide concrete evidence of any wrongdoing.

They also contended that the current PAG-K constitutional provisions were being misinterpreted, and that any necessary amendments should be made within the church's established structures.