I sincerely hope that your arguments here are primarily to amuse and entertain and do not in any way reflect your modus operandi
@Ngimanene na Muchere in real life.
This is because if that’s the way you operate in life you would come across as very petty and trivial indeed. Please take this in the most kindest way. I want to believe otherwise because you sound like those men who tell their wives that they want ngima nene na nyama for supper but when they come home and find that the wife made ngima nene na samaki, they zusha and beat the wife claiming samaki is not nyama.
On another level, your narrow and shallow interpretation of Kenyatta’s directives reminds me of Statutory Interpretation Course, a compulsory and mandatory unit in English Law Schools, whereby a certain case (Smith vs Hugh) is the leading authority on The Mischief Rule. Basically this rule state that if interpretation of a certain statute or directive will lead to a mischief being allowed, Courts must interpret that that was not the wishes of the drafters of the statute.
In the above mentioned case, a certain Lanye in England being aware that the law on prostitution expressly and plainly criminalised prostitution on the streets rented a balcony where she solicited and peddled her trade. When she was arrested she pleaded innocent as that particular statute only criminalises prostitution on the streets. Her appeal was granted up to High Court where Judges ruled that she was guilty as Parliament could not have allowed a mischief to be created by this piece of legislation.
kenyanlist.net
