Kenya’s High Court has suspended the diplomatic immunity that was granted in October by the Kenyan government to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
The ruling on November 25 was triggered after a legal challenge was filed by the Law Society of Kenya against the government. It is due to be reviewed on February 5, 2025.
So for the time being, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation no longer has diplomatic immunity and special privileges in Kenya.
While the ruling raises important questions about the power and privileges wielded by the likes of Gates and other super-wealthy philanthro-capitalists operating in developing countries, the news, which has been reported locally, has mostly been ignored by the international legacy/mainstream media….
The Defender reports: The Kenyan government in October recognized the Gates Foundation and its employees as a charitable trust with special rights in Kenya, under the Privileges and Immunities Act. The new status exempted the foundation and its employees in Kenya from legal action for acts performed in Kenya as part of official duties.
However, the Nov. 25 ruling by Justice Bahati Mwamuye suspends the immunity until at least Feb. 5, 2025, when a court will “review progress and set a hearing date for oral submissions on the petition.”
The ruling also requires all defendants, including Kenya’s minister of foreign affairs and the State Law Office, “to collect, preserve, and compile all documentation regarding the privileges granted to the Gates Foundation, including details of the cooperation agreement,” under threat of legal consequences for non-compliance.
The Gates Foundation and the Kenyan government have until Dec. 10 to respond, Eastleigh Voice reported.
The diplomatic privileges allowed the Gates Foundation “to engage in contracts, legal actions, and property transactions within the country” and granted the foundation “tax exemptions and immunity from legal actions related to their official duties,” leaving many Kenyans “with raised eyebrows,” Kenyans.co.ke reported.
In its legal challenge, the Law Society of Kenya said the immunity “undermines public interest and constitutional principles” and argued that the government’s decision should be declared null and void.
Gates ‘holds governments ransom’
Dr. David Bell, a public health physician and senior scholar at the Brownstone Institute, said the High Court’s suspension “shows the Kenyan system is functioning as it should.”
“From the point of view of the average Kenyan citizen, granting immunity to a large collection of foreigners working for a private foundation … with financial interests in the drugs they are being told to take should be really alarming,” Bell said.
Shabnam Palesa Mohamed, executive director of Children’s Health Defense Africa and founder of the health advocacy organization Transformative Health Justice, said Gates “operates from a position of immense financial wealth and thus political clout. Through using mechanisms of the carrot (funding) and the stick (withdrawal of funding), he holds governments ransom.”
Mohamed called the Kenyan government’s decision to offer the Gates Foundation immunity “horrifying” and said it shows “our governments are captured.”
She added:
“The negative consequences of this shocking decision are far-reaching. They include the erosion of accountability, unequal treatment in the law, damage to national sovereignty, the mockery of public transparency and participation.”
Tim Hinchliffe, editor of The Sociable, said he believes Gates’ efforts to attain diplomatic immunity in countries like Kenya are connected to a profit motive.
“Wherever Gates goes, he stuffs his pockets under the guise of philanthropy while he sits back and collects his returns on investment, no matter the outcome,” Hinchliffe said.
“When you have that much wealth and power — when you have an organization that contributes more to the annual WHO [World Health Organization] budget than most nation-states — then you can buy your way into anything you want, including diplomatic immunity,” Hinchliffe said. “But, that immunity can only last so long.”
For other experts, Gates’ drive to attain diplomatic immunity is an effort to shield himself from legal consequences for his actions and those of the Gates Foundation.
Dr. Meryl Nass, founder of Door to Freedom, told The Defender, “It should be assumed that no one entity would seek such immunity unless they thought they might be at risk of legal penalties.”
Nass added:
“Gates has been charged with many crimes, including for monopolistic business practices, for conducting a clinical trial involving girls in India that was associated with child deaths and lack of informed consent. He has certainly been accused of false advertising of agricultural products in India and Africa.”
Francis Boyle, J.D., Ph.D., professor of international law at the University of Illinois, said, “It is pretty bizarre that they gave Gates privileges and immunities under their domestic legislation in the first place. Obviously, this was an attempt by Gates to shield himself and his accomplices from criminal prosecution and civil liability in Kenya.”
Gates is currently facing a lawsuit in The Netherlands filed by seven COVID-19 vaccine injury victims, and faces legal challenges in at least one other country, India, for damages connected to the vaccines.
Gates immunity in Kenya sets ‘a dangerous precedent’
The Gates Foundation previously defended the Kenyan government’s decision to grant it diplomatic immunity, stating that the foundation operates “according to the typical agreements Kenya makes with other foundations and nonprofits.”
Kenya’s Prime Cabinet Secretary Musalia Mudavadi also defended the decision, describing it as a routine diplomatic practice and noting the foundation’s growing presence in Kenya — including the establishment earlier this month of a sub-regional office in Nairobi, Kenya’s capital.
“The office will expand and enhance the Foundation’s work in healthcare, agriculture and ICT [information and communication technology] in Kenya,” Tuko reported.
However, according to Capital FM, “The decision to extend diplomatic immunity has sparked widespread debate over accountability. Critics argue that the privileges shield the Foundation from legal scrutiny, setting a dangerous precedent.”
Mohamed told The Defender that granting immunity to Gates in Kenya creates diplomatic and economic pressures on other African countries to offer similar legal exemptions. She said:
“Given Gates’ influence and the reach of his philanthropic initiatives across the continent, neighboring countries might feel compelled to follow Kenya’s lead to attract or retain Gates’ investments and programs, particularly in health, education, and agriculture. This could lead to a domino effect, where more African nations feel obligated to grant immunity.
“This will undermine the autonomy of African countries over their legal systems and create a tier of foreign actors operating outside the jurisdiction of local laws, weakening governance and setting a precedent where exemptions are granted based on wealth or influence, rather than merit or need, posing risks to legal sovereignty and equitable governance across the continent.”
Catherine Austin Fitts, founder and publisher of the Solari Report and former U.S. assistant secretary of Housing and Urban Development, said the immunity granted to the Gates Foundation is part of an ongoing trend in which major international organizations are granted such privileges.
“Ever since we created a central bank with sovereign immunity in 1930 — the Bank of International Settlements (BIS) — we have seen the steady creation of international organizations that enjoy sovereign immunity, as well as international treaties that subvert national and local law,” Fitts said. “Not surprisingly this has been followed by the steady erosion of the rule of law and centralization of ownership and wealth … allowing a handful of elites to make war on the population and take assets.”
In the case of the Gates Foundation, Fitts said she believes “granting diplomatic immunity to the Gates Foundation lowers the cost of the foundation prototyping complete control with digital ID while reducing their population with vaccines.”
According to a 2022 investigation by Corey Lynn, “The U.S. has given 76 public international organizations immunities, privileges, and tax exemptions dating back to 1946, just 10 years after BIS expanded its immunities with the Hague Convention of 1936.”
An organization that enjoys such immunity is Gavi, The Vaccine Alliance — an international public-private partnership promoting vaccination, established in 1999 by the Gates Foundation. The foundation holds one of the four permanent seats on Gavi’s board and heavily funds the organization to this day.
According to Lynn, “Almost immediately after World War II, Congress passed the International Organizations Immunities Act, which was signed into law on December 29, 1945. This established immunities, privileges, and tax exemptions for international organizations that might not be considered international organizations under the rules of international laws.”
Gates’ involvement in Africa involves vaccines, agriculture, digital ID
Gates’ massive investment in Africa includes involvement in sectors such as agriculture, public health and more recently, digital IDs in Kenya.
In October, Business Daily Africa reported that the Gates Foundation will advise Kenya on the rollout of Maisha Namba, a new digital ID system. According to Reclaim the Net, “The plan envisages every newborn being assigned a Maisha Namba, which stays with them throughout their life.”
Many of the Gates Foundation’s investments in African agriculture are funded through the Nairobi-based AGRA, previously known as the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa. The foundation is AGRA’s co-founder and biggest donor.
Gates/AGRA’s practices have been criticized by human rights and environmental groups — and by some African farmers, who accused the Gates Foundation of “playing God” and using “its enormous political and monetary influence to crowd out alternative ideas.” Research has shown that AGRA-supported initiatives have failed, sometimes leading to increased hunger.
The Gates Foundation’s activities in Africa also include the development and distribution of vaccines, a program to implement mass circumcision in Swaziland and Zambia to curb the transmission of HIV and the “Target Malaria” project, which has proposed ending malaria by introducing genetically modified, or GMO mosquitoes.
According to Mohamed, “The Gates Foundation funds university programs and, in doing so, influences the policies and the programs’ direction.” The Gates Foundation and the European Union have invested over $100 million to establish an African drugs regulator.
Addressing opposition to Gates’ plans in Kenya, Hinchliffe said, “As we have seen time and again, when the people begin to wake up and rise up against injustice, that type of diplomatic immunity begins to disappear rather quickly.”
“If the Gates Foundation is granted immunity again, to me, that would be a red flag of massive corruption.”