*📢 Legal Challenge: Is Kenyan Property Tax Lawful? 🏡💰* This legal argument, rooted in principles of self-governance, questions the Kenyan government's authority to tax private property. It's a deep dive into what makes a government legitimate and whether you truly consent to its powers. 1. 📜 The "De Facto" Government: A Legacy of IBEACo * The Claim: The current Kenyan government is argued to be a "de facto" (unlawful) entity. Why? Because its origins trace back to the Imperial British East Africa Company (IBEACo). * Historical Basis: IBEACo was a commercial company that established control through military occupation and land appropriation, not through the explicit consent of the indigenous people. This historical "theft" of land and authority means the current government, as its successor, lacks true, inherent legitimacy to impose taxes. * Sources:,,, 2. 👑 Self-Governance Principles: Your Unalienable Rights The challenge draws heavily from the Self Government Federation (SGF) philosophy: * De Jure vs. De Facto: Only a "de jure" (lawful, rightful) government, founded on the explicit consent of the governed, has legitimate power. A "de facto" government, like the one alleged in Kenya's origins, operates without this true authority. [1] * Consent is Key: For the SGF, all just government power must come from explicit, written, and informed consent. Without it, any taxation is seen as "tyranny" and "theft." You cannot be forced into obligations. [1] * Absolute Property Rights: Your right to private property (including animals and farm products) is considered "unalienable" and "Creator-granted," not given by the state. This includes the absolute right to exclude anyone, even the government, from your property. Taxation without your explicit consent violates this fundamental right. [1] * "Private Person" Status: The individual asserts they are a "private person" (a sovereign human being) with a "Kingdom of God" as their true domicile. This status aims to place them outside the jurisdiction of conventional statutory laws and mandatory taxes, as they are not a "statutory person" (a legal creation of the government). [1] * "Right to Be Left Alone": Justice, in this view, is fundamentally "the right to be left alone." Non-consensual taxation directly infringes upon this core right. [1] 3. ⚖️ The Clash with Kenyan Law These SGF principles directly conflict with Kenya's established legal framework: * Broad "Person" Definition: Kenyan law defines "person" broadly to include not just human beings but also companies and associations, making them all subject to legal obligations, including taxes. [1] * Mandatory Taxation: Kenya's tax system is mandatory, established by legislation (Constitution Articles 209 & 210). Taxes are imposed by law, not by individual choice or explicit consent. Even public servants are constitutionally required to pay taxes. [1] * Domicile for Jurisdiction: Kenyan law links domicile (your legal home) and residency (physical presence) to tax obligations, asserting jurisdiction over income based on these conventional legal connections. [2, 3] 4. 🎯 The Core Argument The legal case argues that Kenyan property tax is unlawful because: * The government's authority is "de facto" due to its historical origins from IBEACo's military occupation and land appropriation without consent. * There is no explicit, written consent from the "private person" for this taxation. * The tax violates unalienable, Creator-granted property rights and the "right to be left alone." 5. ⚠️ Important Considerations While this argument is philosophically consistent within the SGF framework, it faces significant challenges in conventional Kenyan courts. Courts typically operate under the established Constitution, which grants the government the power to tax and defines legal personhood and jurisdiction broadly. For more details, refer to the full research report. Which will be published later on during the coming week.