Faiza, The title of the National Anthem displays a good spirit for the whole good people of Kenya. Like any political gathering, the Government should provide sufficient security and not take advantage of such to intimidate or frustrate people's agenda. I pray that you keep it peaceful to the end, but be careful and observant. Dont let any distructive forces to destroy the intention. If possible make sure you have Security provided by the Government because it is your legal and constitutional rights..........let it be that way to the end, so that this spirit will provide a new dawn to Kenya to realize their Constitutional Value and stand firm to protect it against any attack or difformity from the corrupt politicians. Cheers everybody........ Judy Miriga Diaspora Spokesperson Executive Director Confederation Council Foundation for Africa Inc., USA http://socioeconomicforum50.blogspot.com --- On Sun, 6/24/12, Faiza Hassan <antihongo@gmail.com> wrote: From: Faiza Hassan <antihongo@gmail.com> Subject: [uchunguzionline] L O V E P R O T E S T To: kiswahili@yahoogroups.com, uchunguzionline@yahoogroups.com, changemombasa2012@yahoogroups.com Date: Sunday, June 24, 2012, 2:46 PM Kenya Ni Kwetu is organising a public event for Kenyans to think deeply about the culture of impunity on Thursday, 28th June 2012 at Uhuru Park, 10am. This is a call to action for all Kenyans to help build a better country where only leaders guided by the values that h old us together ascend to power, and strive to improve the livelihoods of the citizens, while upholding the Constitution. The event shall be at Uhuru Park's Freedom Corner followed by a peaceful procession to Parliament grounds. Bring your Kenyan flag and vuvuzela and help us sing out loud our national anthem. "Kenya Is Our Home "My Voice, My Vote, Our Future" Kenya Ni Kwetu,Sauti Yangu,Kura Yangu, Maisha Yetu. Amendments betray spirit of ConstitutionSHARE THIS STORYUpdated Friday, June 22 2012 at 12:04 GMT+3 For how much longer will the Judiciary and Executive stand aside and watch as Parliament — working under the motto "For the just (sic) government of men" — mutilates the promise that President Kibaki promulgated on August 10, 2010? Has the thirst for power so blinded the men and women in the august House that they no longer see the forest for the trees? Is it that because they believe the new Constitution can no longer serve their interests, they now wish to render it irrelevant? Do the latest developments indicate that indeed the Executive, as personified by President Kibaki and Prime Minister Raila Odinga are part of the problem? Frightening spirit The Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Bill 2012 appears to be the product of mischief that emanates from the office of the chief legal advisor to the Grand Coalition Government. In the process of its drafting, all manner of sundry items that are purely self-serving have been introduced, some of them touching on the Constitution. And this is where it gets frightening because while statute amendments can be passed by a simple majority of MPs, amendments that touch on the Constitution need Parliament to muster a two-thirds majority to pass. That is the law, but there is a new and rebellious spirit among MPs who see their term coming to an end, and who, because they are not sure of their political future, want to change various laws to ensure they can, at the very least, be nominated to either the Senate or Parliament. Is the chief legal advisor to the Government operating on a brief from the Executive as regards amendments to laws? Has he abandoned the independent thinking expected of his office and opted to follow in his predecessor's shoes? If he has opted to appease the ego of the Executive, then he should remember the famous quote: "An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile — hoping it will eat him last." The role of Parliament in making laws does not, by any means, give MPs the right to subvert the authority granted them by voters to protect and defend the Constitution of Kenya. The oath of office that they retook following the promulgation of the new Constitution bound them to ensure its spirit is never sullied, but what is happening now can only be described as a total betrayal of this grand oath. Tidal wave On Tuesday in the House, a few brave MPs, and they are very few left, reminded their colleagues that the High Court had ruled against debating any motion to vote on accounts before the Finance minister tables an Appropriations Bill. We applaud them for speaking out against a tidal wave of defiance regarding the proper procedure for validating the Budget through Parliament. As the clock winds down on what will be the first General Election under this Constitution, it is becoming clear that the biggest threat to the hard-won freedoms that Kenyans voted for in the new Constitution is Parliament. On the face of it, some of the proposed changes seem very innocent, but in reality they will take Kenya back to pre-2007. An example are the proposed amendments to the Elections Act, including one that seeks to lower the academic qualifications needed for one to become President or MP, and the one meant to strike out the rule that a presidential candidate and his running mate cannot be nominated or be allowed to run for other offices. That this proposed amendment is against the spirit of the Constitution is not in doubt. Will it pass? It is very likely the case, since it serves the interests of the Executive and all MPs without exception. Not every proposed change in the Bill is negative, but quite a number are, enough, it appears, to make the entire document a poisoned chalice for the next Government. MPs hand President another leadership testBy EMEKA-MAYAKA GEKARA gmayaka@ke.nationmedia.com Posted Saturday, June 23 2012 at 20:58 All eyes are on President Kibaki who bears the singular, if unenviable, responsibility of having to make the decision to approve or reject controversial amendments to laws on elections and political parties that have been widely described as self-serving changes. The amendments have already angered the country and divided the Cabinet. And unlike in the past, some Cabinet ministers from the President's wing of the coalition like Amos Kimunya have joined calls for him to reject the amendments. Powerful constitutional commissions, the Law Society of Kenya, a section of Cabinet ministers and wananchi have also asked President Kibaki not to sign the offensive Bills into law saying they represent a breach of the Constitution. If the changes are signed into law, they would see MPs abandon their parties without losing their seats and losers in the presidential, gubernatorial and parliamentary elections eligible for nomination to county and parliamentary positions. The decision will be a delicate balancing act for President Kibaki. If he approves the changes, the President will not only set himself on a collision course with sections of his Cabinet and the constitutional teams that have threatened to seek court action but also with wananchi who have reacted with anger to the amendments. Cabinet ministers James Orengo, Dalmas Otieno, Mr Kimunya and presidential hopeful Peter Kenneth have appealed to the President to reject the proposals even as Attorney-General Githu Muigai has encouraged those opposed to the changes to seek judicial intervention. In a sense, the Miscellaneous Amendment Bill that contains the changes is an assembly of various competing interests. Whereas some politicians would be happy with the enactment of certain changes, others are uncomfortable with some of the amendments. Notably, most of the MPs who spport the party hopping amendment are from President's wing of the coalition. The complication is that whereas some Kenyans favour the requirement for higher academic qualifications for Members of Parliament and Senate, most of them are opposed to the changes allowing MPs to abandon their parties without losing their seats. All the proposed changes are in the same Bill. But a number of MPs, especially those opposed to the degree threshold, would pray that the President does not sign it into law; but they still hope he legalises party hopping. "President Kibaki must summon his wisdom to guide him on the decision because it may end up annoying many Kenyans and taint his legacy," said Mr Ken Wafula, the head of the National Council of NGOs. "The choices are clear for him. He would have to choose between protection of the Constitution, which he swore to uphold, and mutilation. "He would have to choose between integrity in politics or encourage indiscipline in political parties. We will use all means possible to resist attempts to deface the letter and kill the spirit of the Constitution." There is also the small matter of judicial intervention. As in the 2011 case in which the High Court rejected his nomination of top judicial officials, President Kibaki will be left with egg on his face if he signs the amendments into law only to have the Judiciary declare them unconstitutional. Mr Charles Nyachae, the chairman of the Constitutional Implementation Commission, has declared that he will go to court if the President accepts the controversial amendments with far-reaching implications for the coming General Election. "If there is a time for Kenyans to use their legitimate methods and authority to defend their Constitution then that time is now. I encourage them to seek judicial intervention," he said. There are already indications that the LSK might move to court seeking a declaration that would nullify the changes. This would effectively open another battlefront between the Legislature and Judiciary. "The changes are aimed to serve the personal interests of the current MPs which is in direct contravention of Article 161 of the Constitution," Mr Nyachae said. The article says MPs should not pass laws that benefit their situation. Parliament erred; JSC should not vet magistrates
By AHMEDNASIR ABDULLAHI Posted Saturday, June 23 2012 at 17:34 To describe our Parliament as a conceited rogue institution that solely caters for the selfish interests of its members is an understatement. This week, Parliament passed laws that accentuate and emphasise the danger it poses to the existence of our constitutional order. Three amendments relating to the academic qualifications of candidates who can run for certain public offices, the phenomenon of party-hoppers and the vetting of judges and magistrates outraged Kenyans in different ways and degree. The first two have adequately been addressed by a number of interest groups and the majority of Kenyans appreciate the debate that informs the same. Reactionary forces What no one is talking about is how Parliament, at the behest of saboteurs and dark reactionary forces, has crippled the vetting of judges and magistrates, a process Kenyans voted for and incorporated in the Constitution. A majority of Kenyans agreed that the vetting of judges and magistrates be undertaken in order to address, once and for all, the historical limitations that bedevilled the judiciary. A lot of effort, time and resources have gone into implementing the vetting. The vetting board, once constituted, started its operations with gusto and has so far gone remarkably well. It must be appreciated that the vetting process is almost unique in the world and great effort was made in ensuring that it is fair and passes the test of due process and constitutional thresholds of fair hearing. The vetting board has finalised with the judges of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal. It has started vetting judges of the High Court and is scheduled to finalise with members of the court by October/November this year. Some people argue that the vetting process is slow and certain time limits ought to be imposed. That would be a grave mistake. This process addresses serious national and personal issues. Men and women who were career judges are being vetted in order to determine whether their career is terminated or not. It is a very delicate process and great care and time must be devoted to each and every case. It simply can't be rushed. Parliament has now passed an amendment to the law that transfers the vetting of more than 350 magistrates from the vetting board to the Judicial Service Commission (JSC). As a representative of the Law Society of Kenya in the JSC, I share their fears and opposition to this amendment. This is for a number of pertinent reasons. First, since the vetting board has been doing a remarkably great job, why curtail its mandate? The answer is very simple. The government is not happy with the thoroughness of the vetting board and wants a process that is less rigid and accountable. Second, the JSC doesn't have the time and resources to vet 350 magistrates. It is the only part-time commission in Kenya. Its members are engaged in other activities. Sensitive offices Members such as the Chief Justice and the Attorney-General are in charge of sensitive offices and will have little or no time to vet 350 magistrates for a number of years. Third, it will probably take four to five years for a part-time PSC to vet 350 magistrates. Fourth, the JSC is basically an institution dominated by members of the judiciary. Every level of the judiciary has a representative. There are only five non-members of the judiciary. Can an institution heavily dominated by members of the judiciary be seen by ordinary Kenyans to do a decent job in vetting magistrates? Fifth, a foreign component is a must in the vetting process. And the JSC can't satisfy that requirement. The writer is the publisher of Nairobi Law Monthly ahmednasir@yahoo.com |
Karibu Jukwaa la www.mwanabidii.com Pata nafasi mpya za Kazi www.kazibongo.blogspot.com Blogu ya Habari na Picha www.patahabari.blogspot.com Kujiondoa Tuma Email kwenda wanabidii+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com Utapata Email ya kudhibitisha ukishatuma Disclaimer: Everyone posting to this Forum bears the sole responsibility for any legal consequences of his or her postings, and hence statements and facts must be presented responsibly. Your continued membership signifies that you agree to this disclaimer and pledge to abide by our Rules and Guidelines.
0 comments:
Post a Comment