Mwalimu-G
Elder Lister
*HIGHLIGHTS OF A.G’S STATEMENT IN RESPONSE TO CHIEF JUSTICE MARAGA’S STATEMENT*
•
There are clear direct communication lines between the Chief Justice, the Attorney General and the President, therefore public attacks of H.E the President by the Chief Justice are a breach of established norms of government and violate our system of governance and Constitutional democracy.
•The Chief Justice is making public statements on matters that are in court and which may end up in the Supreme Court. Public statements violate sub-judice rule and are unusual and unorthodox.
•The Attorney General has already appealed the High Court decision directing President to appoint all the 41 judges including those with adverse reports.
•The Executive’s decision to appeal the judgment shows the President’s commitment to the rule of law and respect for the Courts and the Constitution which he swore to defend.
•The delay in prosecuting the appeal is due to the Judiciary’s failure to provide typed proceedings to enable the Attorney General to prosecute the appeal.
•On the role of the President in appointment of judges, the Executive does not believe that the President is merely a rubberstamp of recommendations of the JSC especially if such recommendation would undermine constitutional values.
•This is a fundamental constitutional question that would easily (most likely) end up in the Supreme Court yet the President of the Supreme Court is already making pre-judicial and conclusive public statements on the matter.
•The CJ claims that some of the individuals are already serving judges, but this is a question for the CJ as head of the Judiciary to answer not the President. (Note: The Judiciary has failed to institute disciplinary proceedings against the same judges. The Chief Justice is saying, its okay to have corrupt judges)
•CJ’s statement is an attempt to hide from the fact that under his tenure the Judiciary has suffered case backlogs e.g corruption cases that have delayed in Courts and the President has highlighted this severally.
•The allegation that there are 1 billion worth of court orders that have not been obeyed is not supported by any facts.
•On Kariobangi evictions, the CJ intention is to whip up public emotions, the CJ has not provided facts about the order. The CJ knows that violation of orders is addressed in court through contempt of Court proceedings not emotional public pronouncements. Again the Chief Justice is pre-empting the outcome of ongoing cases.
•On the allegation that the executive has court orders worth Kshs 1 billion that have not been obeyed/implemented…The A.G’s office has paid approximately Kshs 1.5 billion (Kshs 1,567.983,509.25) and as we speak pending bills worth Kshs 113 million are being processed.
•The pending bills go back about 20 years and a task force was established to vet and recommend payments. Some claims have turned out to be FAKE. An example is a Kshs 80 Million claim where the Court file is not existent. In other instances, the pending bills (court orders) do not reflect our economic position and are not based on established jurisprudence.
•The Executive is the custodian of public funds vetting before payment is prudent financial management.
•Our constitutional democracy requires that all organs of Government work together in mutual respect and deference and the Chief Justice’s public statements against the President undermine this especially when they are based on misrepresentation, distortions and half-truths.
•The Chief Justice has failed to cultivate the spirit of constructive consultation and instead resulted to grandstanding and populist brinkmanship with the Executive as his bogeyman.
•The Judiciary’s leadership has failed to unlock critical corruption cases some of which involve influential judicial officers.
•The Public attacks of the President and the Executive seek to erode the confidence the Executive has in the judiciary and put judicial officer into an anti-Executive mode…
*In summary*
•
It is reckless for the Chief Justice to make a public statements without facts and based on half-truths just to whip up public emotions.
•On the appointment of 41 judges, the Executive has a different interpretation of the President’s role. The President is not a mere rubberstamp. Appointing judges who have adverse reports would be failing to respect and honour the Constitution. The President will not do that.
•There is an ongoing case on the appointment of 41 judges and the A.G’s appeal is pending but the Court has delayed to give typed proceedings so that the A.G can file the record of appeal.
•This matter may as well end-up in the Supreme Court and it is irresponsible for the Chief Justice to make a public statement with a very biased opinion of the matter.
•The President is not to blame for the backlog of cases, it is the Chief Justice who has failed to give proper leadership in the Judiciary for five years.
UNICORN EXPLAINER
•
There are clear direct communication lines between the Chief Justice, the Attorney General and the President, therefore public attacks of H.E the President by the Chief Justice are a breach of established norms of government and violate our system of governance and Constitutional democracy.•
The Chief Justice is making public statements on matters that are in court and which may end up in the Supreme Court. Public statements violate sub-judice rule and are unusual and unorthodox.•
The Attorney General has already appealed the High Court decision directing President to appoint all the 41 judges including those with adverse reports.•
The Executive’s decision to appeal the judgment shows the President’s commitment to the rule of law and respect for the Courts and the Constitution which he swore to defend.•
The delay in prosecuting the appeal is due to the Judiciary’s failure to provide typed proceedings to enable the Attorney General to prosecute the appeal.•
On the role of the President in appointment of judges, the Executive does not believe that the President is merely a rubberstamp of recommendations of the JSC especially if such recommendation would undermine constitutional values.•
This is a fundamental constitutional question that would easily (most likely) end up in the Supreme Court yet the President of the Supreme Court is already making pre-judicial and conclusive public statements on the matter.•
The CJ claims that some of the individuals are already serving judges, but this is a question for the CJ as head of the Judiciary to answer not the President. (Note: The Judiciary has failed to institute disciplinary proceedings against the same judges. The Chief Justice is saying, its okay to have corrupt judges)•
CJ’s statement is an attempt to hide from the fact that under his tenure the Judiciary has suffered case backlogs e.g corruption cases that have delayed in Courts and the President has highlighted this severally.•
The allegation that there are 1 billion worth of court orders that have not been obeyed is not supported by any facts.•
On Kariobangi evictions, the CJ intention is to whip up public emotions, the CJ has not provided facts about the order. The CJ knows that violation of orders is addressed in court through contempt of Court proceedings not emotional public pronouncements. Again the Chief Justice is pre-empting the outcome of ongoing cases. •
On the allegation that the executive has court orders worth Kshs 1 billion that have not been obeyed/implemented…The A.G’s office has paid approximately Kshs 1.5 billion (Kshs 1,567.983,509.25) and as we speak pending bills worth Kshs 113 million are being processed.•
The pending bills go back about 20 years and a task force was established to vet and recommend payments. Some claims have turned out to be FAKE. An example is a Kshs 80 Million claim where the Court file is not existent. In other instances, the pending bills (court orders) do not reflect our economic position and are not based on established jurisprudence.•
The Executive is the custodian of public funds vetting before payment is prudent financial management.•
Our constitutional democracy requires that all organs of Government work together in mutual respect and deference and the Chief Justice’s public statements against the President undermine this especially when they are based on misrepresentation, distortions and half-truths.•
The Chief Justice has failed to cultivate the spirit of constructive consultation and instead resulted to grandstanding and populist brinkmanship with the Executive as his bogeyman.•
The Judiciary’s leadership has failed to unlock critical corruption cases some of which involve influential judicial officers.•
The Public attacks of the President and the Executive seek to erode the confidence the Executive has in the judiciary and put judicial officer into an anti-Executive mode…*In summary*
•
It is reckless for the Chief Justice to make a public statements without facts and based on half-truths just to whip up public emotions.•
On the appointment of 41 judges, the Executive has a different interpretation of the President’s role. The President is not a mere rubberstamp. Appointing judges who have adverse reports would be failing to respect and honour the Constitution. The President will not do that.•
There is an ongoing case on the appointment of 41 judges and the A.G’s appeal is pending but the Court has delayed to give typed proceedings so that the A.G can file the record of appeal.•
This matter may as well end-up in the Supreme Court and it is irresponsible for the Chief Justice to make a public statement with a very biased opinion of the matter.•
The President is not to blame for the backlog of cases, it is the Chief Justice who has failed to give proper leadership in the Judiciary for five years.UNICORN EXPLAINER
