APRM • SECOND COUNTRY REVIEW REPORT OF THE REPUBLIC OF KENYA 3.2.2.2 Challenges 74. There are three basic challenges in this area, including: • Bureaucratic and political stumbling blocks to a more speedy process of ratification; • Effective and up-to-date record-keeping in regard of the status of the standards and codes; and • Strengthening the institutional and societal capacities for ensuring observance of the standards and codes. 3.2.3 Recommendations of the Panel 75. The Panel recommends that Government: i) Sign and ratify relevant outstanding international, regional and bilateral instruments important to the sustenance of democracy and good political governance in Kenya; (Government of Kenya, Parliament) ii) Continuous education and sensitization to enhance public awareness of rights and available institutional arrangements to claim these rights, including complaints mechanisms and providing legal aid; (Kenya National Human Rights, Civil society organizations) iii) Establish a central repository or data base of all International and regional standards and codes, with dates of ratification. (The Office of the Attorney General, the Kenya Law Reporting website) 3.3 OBJECTIVE 1: ENHANCE CONSTITUTIONAL DEMOCRACY AND THE RULE OF LAW 3.3.1 Summary of the Country Self-Assessment 76. The CSAR noted that the Kenyan Government had not only embarked on an ambitious constitutional review process, but had also undertaken specific reforms in the Justice system, anti-corruption and ethics, procurements, recruitments, and establishment of an Ombudsman system. 77. The long journey of constitution review ended in 2010, following a successful referendum that was held on 4 August 2010. As required by the law mandating the referendum, the new Constitution was formally promulgated at a ceremony held on 27 August 2010. The Constitution of Kenya 2010 was in a very significant sense a product of the recommendations | 76 |