doe that mean that institutions around the country would not have taken liberties and used the word republic before the official event? perhaps even hospitals tired of issuing documents stating children were subjects of Great Britain?
just a thought,but the idea that theres a clear deliniation point across society,especially going back to the early 60’s,a time well before the general usage of computers would seem a stretch.
The point you are making may well be as true as summer rain, but may be equally irrelevant. I believe it is very possible that despite the lack of the word “Republic” in the 1963 constitution, more than likely a British concoction, the intent of newly independent Kenya was to establish a Republic from day one, and this intention may well have been manifested in the terminology they used to describe themselves as they went forward.
The use of the term Republic of Kenya on this form may be meaningful or it may not be. In order to know, someone who KNOWS what similar documents issued in Kenya in 1964 actually looked like needs to make such a detemination.
And that’s not you or me.
If anyone has a similar document, issued in Kenya in the time period in question, and which provenance is known, were to post it, this issue might be settled.
Check the posting times. Posts are appearing faster than people can reply and read.
By common usage, we have long referred to the US as being a republic. Yet the US Constitution does not refer to the US as being a republic. The closest is that it guarantees a “republican form of government” to the states.
Try following your own advice and see post 480 above and try the link there and see of you remain so cocksure.