In Summary
  • Having sworn to protect the Constitution which explicitly provides for independent institutions, the President and his Deputy must stop threatening the Judiciary.
  •  It is alarming that the Jubilee high command has launched insults, character assassination and mudslinging on the Chief Justice David Maraga, Supreme Court judges and other judicial officers.

President Uhuru Kenyatta and his Deputy William Ruto have set on a dangerous path by threatening and intimidating the Judiciary following the nullification of their victory in last month’s elections.

This is a direct breach of the law and an affront to democracy. It smacks of intolerance and dictatorship and casts the Executive in bad light.

Having sworn to protect the Constitution which explicitly provides for independent institutions, the President and his Deputy must stop threatening the Judiciary, particularly the country’s highest court.

 It is particularly alarming that the Jubilee high command has launched insults, character assassination and mudslinging on the Chief Justice David Maraga, Supreme Court judges and other judicial officers, casting aspersions on their integrity and suitability to hold the top offices. 

There have also been insinuations that the politicians in power intend to use their positions to take unspecified action against the Judiciary. 

NASA

Yet, when the National Super Alliance rejected the election results that declared President Kenyatta and his running mate, Mr Ruto, the winners of the August 8 election, they were promptly told to challenge the outcome in court.

The underpinning was that the court was the best place to adjudicate the matter — and rightly so considering the uncomfortable history of post-election violence.

And it took a lot of soul searching before the Nasa team led by their presidential candidate Raila Odinga and his running mate Kalonzo Musyoka went to court as they had serious reservations over its independence and ability to arbitrate.

But the court did not disappoint, making what some have described as a historic ruling. It asserted its authority and made a bold decision — overturning the re-election of a President — a feat rarely heard of in our part of the world.

The judges were also critical of the manner in which the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission conducted the presidential election.

Like in all such judicial processes, there are those who support the decision while others disagree with it.

SUPREME COURT

In 2013, the then Coalition for Reforms and Democracy (Cord) of Mr Odinga went to the Supreme Court to challenge the victory of Mr Kenyatta but lost the petition.

Page 1 of 2