Never let the facts get in the way of scapegoating and xenophobia. Thus the calls to close down Dadaab refugee camp and resettle its 350,000 or so inhabitants in Somalia. Whether or not they’re all Somali.

The calls began with the parliamentarian for Garissa and assorted politicians from the region. It was picked up by no less than the office of the Deputy Presidency. Then echoed, unsurprisingly, by the umbrella for the evangelical churches (determined to frame violent extremism as a battle between Christianity and Islam). And, surprisingly, by the trade union umbrella.

The parliamentary human-rights caucus put out a measured statement, sensibly calling for respect for our Constitutional and treaty obligations and, even more sensibly, for longer-term “solutions” such as enabling refugees to work freely and integrate. Coastal politicians fell on this side of the debate.

The public, however, remains divided. Scapegoating and xenophobia come easy when people are angry and scared. As Kenyans are in the aftermath of the Garissa attack.

The immediate reason for the calls for the camp’s closure is evident. Intelligence has apparently informed the executive and relevant parliamentary committees that the camp is used for the co-ordination and planning of attacks by Al Shabaab. Which may be true. But so, presumably, are other sites in Kenya given the geographic spread of attacks both big and small.

The GoK says it is annoyed with the slow pace of implementation of the tripartite agreement between it, the government of Somalia and UNHCR on voluntary returns.

But the tripartite agreement was always intended to be piloted first (which has now happened). It was also always intended to be based not on “push” factors in Kenya (which would make the returns involuntary) but on “pull’ factors in Somalia. Those factors, to date, are neither strong nor stable.

The GoS barely controls the territory around the capital. No sane person would want to return to territory still marked by clashes between Al Shabaab and the African Union Mission in Somalia or risk being caught in the cross-fire.

Neither would any sane person want to return to territory controlled by Al Shabaab and risk being targeted for any number of its odd demands: Growing beards long, no wearing short trousers, no listening to music, watching football or chewing khat.

But the worst demands are all the strictures around simply being women: Covering hair, covering faces, not going out alone, not running businesses, not being in the company of men other than those from one’s family. Risking medieval punishments like amputations, lashings and stoning.

We are not Saudis. Including those of us who happen to be Somali. Let’s be honest. Life under Al Shabaab is not only not fun, it is also dangerous and unnecessarily restrictive.

The parliamentary human-rights caucus is correct. We need longer-term solutions. Which do not include forced encampment and forced returns. But do include integration. Surely the GoK, with its sudden appetite for pan-Africanism, could set the example. For the Africa-without-borders to come.

L. Muthoni Wanyeki is Amnesty International’s regional director for East Africa, the Horn and the Great Lakes