This article analyses the content and implications of the Supreme Court of Kenya’s judgment in Methodist Church in Kenya v Mohamed Fugicha and 3 Others. There, by majority decision, the Supreme Court overturned the Court of Appeal’s ruling that reasonable accommodation be made for the wearing of Islamic hijabs by female Muslim students in Kenyan schools. While Methodist Church in Kenya was expected to clarify the scope of the right to manifest religious belief in Kenya, the Supreme Court used specious logic based on legalism to avoid that issue. This article shows how the majority decision contradicts principles of enforcement of constitutional rights by focusing unduly on procedural technicalities, avoiding the core issue of permissible restrictions on religious expression and leaving key legal questions unresolved. It also highlights the well-reasoned dissenting opinion that addressed the core issue and which has crucial import for future development of religious freedom jurisprudence in Kenya

中文翻译：

---

肯尼亚学校的宪法和伊斯兰头巾：最高法院对肯尼亚卫理公会的似是而非的约束

本文分析了肯尼亚最高法院在肯尼亚卫理公会诉 Mohamed Fugicha 等 3 人案中判决的内容和启示。在那里，最高法院以多数决定推翻了上诉法院的裁决，即为肯尼亚学校的穆斯林女学生戴伊斯兰头巾提供合理便利的裁决。虽然预计肯尼亚卫理公会会澄清在肯尼亚表达宗教信仰的权利的范围，但最高法院使用基于法律主义的似是而非的逻辑来避免这个问题。本文展示了多数决定如何通过过度关注程序技术性、避免允许限制宗教表达的核心问题以及未解决关键的法律问题而与宪法权利的执行原则相矛盾。