The courtroom is the last place love stories should end, but when they do, it’s rarely quiet. Take Kenya’s latest legal spectacle: a ruling declaring alimony “anathema to equality” and reviving the debate over whether dowry must be refunded when marriages collapse. The contradictions are almost cinematic — men cheering, women fuming, and cultural elders shaking their heads over tea. It’s like watching the old meet the new in a legal boxing ring, only this time, no one seems sure who’s winning.

For decades, alimony was the financial aftertaste of divorce — one partner, often the man, paying the other, often the woman, a periodic sum “to maintain the lifestyle she was accustomed to.” But in 2023, the High Court in CKN v DMO turned that notion upside down, ruling that alimony contradicts Article 45 of Kenya’s Constitution, which grants equal rights during and after marriage. Equality, it seems, just killed the traditional alimony cheque.

Alimony vs. Maintenance — Same Coin, Different Faces

Now, both men and women can — in theory — seek spousal maintenance, but not alimony in the old-fashioned sense. The distinction matters. Alimony was gendered, rooted in the assumption that men earn and women depend. Maintenance, under Section 77 of the Marriage Act, 2014, is gender-neutral and based on need and capacity. If you can work, the court expects you to. Equality, as it turns out, comes with a job description.

Still, the reality is rarely tidy. After the death of former Bomet governor Dr. Joyce Laboso, Kenyans debated when her widower, Edwin Abonyo, appeared as a dependent entitled to her estate. Could a man really claim support from his wife’s estate? The law said yes. Equality, after all, cuts both ways. It was an uncomfortable reminder that support isn’t a gendered privilege — it’s a reciprocal right.

Dowry Refund and the Comedy of Contradictions

And yet, equality hasn’t erased the absurdities. Picture this: a woman marrying an elderly tycoon — a man with more wrinkles than worries — in what her critics call “strategic love.” He pays immense, colossal, perhaps even grandiloquent dowry, believing he’s secured companionship. But should the marriage crumble, the latest ruling might require the dowry to be refunded. Imagine returning cows and cash decades later because “the union didn’t work out.” Somewhere between the registry and the cowshed, modern law and African custom collide, horns first.

Opponents of alimony have long argued that it enabled daylight robbery. Some ex-spouses received lifelong payments, living luxuriously off marriages they’d long emotionally exited. There were no clear timelines — how long was alimony supposed to last? Until death? Remarriage? Divine intervention? Courts wavered. Maintenance orders, too, lacked consistency. One judge might award three years; another, indefinite support. The absence of uniform guidelines meant family law sometimes resembled moral roulette.

Between Equality and Empathy

But the pendulum can swing too far. Many women — and increasingly, men — sacrifice careers to raise children or manage households. Their economic contributions, though intangible, hold families together. When divorce hits, such spouses face double jeopardy: career gaps that make re-entry into the workforce hard, and now, dwindling prospects of post-marital support. The promise of equality, if untempered by empathy, risks punishing the very sacrifices that nurture families.

So, how do stay-at-home spouses protect themselves? Prenuptial agreements are a start — they may sound unromantic, but they’re realistic. A prenup can define property rights, clarify maintenance obligations, and protect each party from post-divorce disputes. Couples can also document non-financial contributions — caregiving, homemaking, supporting a partner’s education or business — which courts consider in property division. Equality doesn’t mean erasing these contributions; it means recognising them fairly.

When Men Ask for Maintenance

Then comes the laughter-through-tears part of Kenya’s legal evolution. Somewhere, a man jokes, “So now, if I marry a rich woman, I can finally relax?” The answer: not quite. The court will still ask if you genuinely need support or just prefer being “maintained.” As one judge put it, marriage is not a lottery ticket. Still, the law now allows a husband to claim maintenance if he proves dependency. That’s equality in action — though social media still hasn’t forgiven the image of “sponsors” suddenly turning into “dependents.”

And for those who think dowry refund and alimony abolition restore male dignity, there’s a catch. The same equality doctrine can turn around and demand financial disclosure, shared responsibilities, and property division that leaves no spouse untouched. You can’t shout “equality!” only when it benefits your gender.

Where Culture and Modern Law Collide

The tension is cultural as much as legal. Traditionalists argue that dowry is symbolic, sealing families together, not a commercial deposit to be refunded. Progressives see it as outdated, especially when combined with modern marriage laws. But perhaps the real debate is about value: what does society owe those who give years, labour, and love to a marriage that collapses?

And speaking of value, how far can equality stretch before it becomes absurd? A daughter suing her parents for indemnity after a dowry refund dispute? It sounds like courtroom satire, but recent rulings have shown that when law, culture, and ego mix, anything is possible. The courts have become referees in family feuds that once ended with elders under mango trees.

Has Equality Cured Injustice or Just Renamed It?

The alimony debate in Kenya exposes our cultural growing pains. We wanted fairness, and we got it — but fairness is not the same as justice. Men no longer feel hunted by perpetual payments, but women who sacrificed careers for children now face financial vulnerability. The dowry refund rule satisfies tradition but confuses modernity.

In my view, the law must evolve toward contextual equality: one that recognises need, effort, and contribution, not just identical rights. Maintenance shouldn’t be a windfall for the lazy nor a punishment for the generous. Clearer judicial guidelines are needed — on duration, calculation, and enforcement — so that “maintenance” doesn’t become a ghost of alimony past.

Ultimately, love will remain unpredictable, but the law doesn’t have to be. Marriage should begin with trust and end — if it must — with fairness. Perhaps, before saying “I do,” couples should also say, “I understand.”

FAQs

1. Can a man in Kenya seek maintenance after divorce?
Yes. The Marriage Act, 2014 allows either spouse to seek maintenance, provided they can prove need and dependency, regardless of gender.

2. What’s the difference between alimony and maintenance in Kenya?
Alimony was a gendered term implying male-to-female payments. Maintenance is gender-neutral and based on ability and need, not traditional roles.

3. Does equality mean dowry refunds are now mandatory?
Not always. The recent ruling applies mainly to customary marriages, but many legal experts argue that dowry is symbolic, not refundable property.

Related: Prenuptial Agreements in Kenya: Is a Prenuptial Agreement a Red Flag?