A beach hotel, which has been sued by two guests says that it does not condone any form of discrimination.
Dhanjal Investments, trading as Travellers Beach Hotel, which has been sued by James Karugia and Grace Malila for alleged discrimination, says that it is a reputable facility with very respectable staff and highly rated.
In response to a petition filed by Mr Karugia and Ms Malila, Travellers Beach Hotel through an affidavit from its head of security Daniel Muthini says that all visitors are informed verbally and in writing that they must stop at the entrance for security checks.
The hotel, which says that it reserves the right of admission, argues that security checks are also to protect the institution since all its services are postpaid and some visitors tend to disappear without settling bills after services are rendered.
“I wish to state that the main gate is designed in a way that every personnel entering the hotel including members of staff is subject to a search,” states Mr Muthini in his affidavit.
He says he was informed by a guard at the gate that upon being asked for identification, Mr Karugia responded that he was a lawyer conversant with the law and there was no law requiring him to produce any identification for him to spend his money at the hotel.
“Upon being informed that it is a policy at the hotel hence the reason there was some small traffic of motor vehicles awaiting search, he said that the policies were contrary to his constitutional rights and would not allow anyone to search him as it infringed his privacy,” states Mr Muthini.
Mr Muthini also says that he talked to the petitioners and informed them that the security requirements were for their own safety but they told him that they would rather leave than be subjected to a search yet the society holds them so highly.
“I believe that the petitioners have not enumerated how they were humiliated or degraded and which law was breached thus the pleadings do not meet the threshold of a petition,” Mr Muthini further states.
Mr Muthini says that he was startled that the petitioners have approached court claiming that their rights have been infringed yet they were unwilling to undergo a security check.
Mr Karugia and Ms Malila want a declaration issued that the hotel violated the constitution by discriminating against them.
They are also seeking general damages for mental torture, distress, inhumane treatment, and breach of constitutional rights.
The petitioners claim that on September 1 last year, they sought to access the hotel for purposes of accessing food and other leisure and entertainment activities within the premises.
They further say that at the entrance of the hotel, they were stopped for no reason and asked to identify themselves as other individuals who came after they were allowed into the premises without any scrutiny, harassment, or requirement of identification.
“The petitioners were subsequently harassed by the security personnel at the entrance and further subjected to humiliating and degrading treatment for no reason and thereafter denied admission into the hotel,” part of the petition states.
According to the petitioners, other individuals allowed into the premises without being subjected to humiliating treatment or the requirement were individuals of Asian, American, or European descent.
They argue that the conduct of the hotel’s security personnel was uncalled for, unwarranted, humiliating, and contrary to the dictates of human decency and the conduct was outright discrimination against them based on the colour of their skin and race.
“The petitioners have an inalienable freedom from discrimination on the basis of race and have the constitutionally protected right to be treated fairly. The petitioners were treated with ridicule, humiliation, and contempt on the basis of the colour of their skin,” argue the petitioners.
The petitioners argue that the respondent is in breach of the provisions of Article 27 (4) of the constitution by conduct that constitutes discrimination against them and a breach of the right to equal treatment without any valid or legitimate basis.
In his supporting affidavit, Mr Karugia says that he lives in Nairobi and had travelled to Mombasa on August 24 last year for business which was planned to last for a week.
He further says that on September 1 last year while in the company of Ms Malila went to the hotel to have food and other leisure and entertainment activities within the premises.
“At the entrance of Travelers Beach Hotel, we were stopped by the security personnel for no reason at all and subsequently asked to show our identity cards,” says Mr Karugia.
Mr Karugia says that while that was happening, he could see many individuals being allowed to go in without being asked to identify themselves and without any question, harassment, or scrutiny to which they were being subjected.
“The security personnel asked us questions, subsequently harassed and ridiculed us, declined to allow us to enter the hotel premises, and ultimately rudely and unceremoniously ordered us to leave,” states Mr Karugia.
Mr Karugia says that the following day, he lodged a complaint with the hotel on the matter since the conduct of its security personnel was uncalled for, unwarranted, humiliating, and contrary to the dictates of human decency.
The case has been fixed for hearing on April 9 when parties are expected to highlight their submissions.
