R.M v ATTORNEY GENERAL & 4 others [2010] eKLR away from the restrictive approach adopted by Nyamu and Wendo JJ. in Alphonse Mwangemi Munga & 10 others vs African Safari Club Ltd [2008] eklr, that Section 84 of the Constitution does not envisage one person bringing a common suit on behalf of others, except where the person whose right is alleged to have been infringed is detained. Nyamu and Emukule JJ expressed the view that there was nothing to prevent an individual or a group of individuals with a common grievance, alleging in one suit that their individual fundamental rights and freedoms under Sections 70 to 83 of the Constitution have been infringed in relation to each one of them, and to them collectively. 105. We are entirely in agreement with the above view as it is consistent with the definition of the word “person” in Section 123 of the Constitution, and Section 3 of The Interpretation and General Provisions Act Cap 2. That definition gives standing to corporate and unincorporated bodies in respect of the enforcement of some fundamental rights and freedoms. The definition is consistent with the broader interpretation of section 84 of the Constitution, giving locus standi in matters of public interest to a person to pursue a suit for breach or threatened breach of fundamental rights and freedoms, of a body of persons to which he belongs or has an interest. This takes us back to the three ancillary questions which we posed earlier: Who is an intersex person? Is there a body of persons in this country known as intersex persons or intersexuals? Is the petitioner an intersex person? Who is an intersex person? 106. The first question we have to grapple with is, who is an intersex person? There is no definition of intersex in Kenyan Law. Two South African Statutes were referred to us. These are: Alteration of Sex Description and Status Act, and The Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act. In both statutes, intersex is defined as “a congenital physical sexual differentiation which is atypical to whatever degree.” We were also referred to the Australian Legislation Act 2001, which defines an intersex person as “a person who because of a genetic condition was born with reproductive organs or sex chromosomes that are not exclusively male or female”. 107. In the Concise Oxford English Dictionary, intersex is defined as “an abnormal condition of being intermediate between male and female, hermaphroditism – a hermaphrodite.” This is the definition which was applied in Corbett vs Corbett (supra). In that case, Ormrod J described a hermaphrodite as follows: “The hermaphrodite has been known since earliest times as an individual who has some of the sexual characteristics of both sexes. In more recent times the true hermaphrodite has been distinguished from the pseudo – hermaphrodite. The true hermaphrodite has both a testis and an ovary and some of the other physical characteristics of both sexes. The pseudo-hermaphrodite has either testes or ovaries, and other sexual organs, which do not correspond with the gonads which are present.” 108. We have found a more apt and comprehensive description of the term intersex in an article “Who will make room for the intersexed” by Kate Haas, published in the American Society of Law and Ethics Boston University School of Law Journal, “American Journal of Law and Medicine, Volume 30, Number 1”. In that article the term “Intersex” is described as follows: “The term "intersex" is used to describe a variety of conditions in which a fetus develops differently than a typical XX female or XY male. Some intersexed children are born with "normal" male or female external genitals that do not correspond to their hormones. Others are born with a noticeable combination of male and female external features, and still others have visually male http://www.kenyalaw.org - Page 29/45