Debate has been raging following last week's ruling by the three judges over the inclusion of Kadhi courts in the Constitution. Senior Political Writer Stephen Makabila and Staff Reporter Mangoa Mosota spoke to Saboti MP Eugene Wamalwa and Nyando MP Fred Outa on whether they are for the planned censure Motion against the three filed by Imenti Central MP Gitobu Imanyara.
YES: Nyando MP Fred Outa
QUESTION: Do you support the planned Motion of censure on the three judges in Parliament?
ANSWER: Yes I do. I support the Motion 100 per cent because it is timely. The ruling by the judges was not fair at all. It remains suspicious and I am sure there are other MPs who also support the Motion.
 |
| Nyando MP Fred Outa |
 |
| Saboti MP Eugene Wamalwa |
QUESTION: Is the Motion not interference on the independence of the Judiciary as an organ of Government?
ANSWER: I do not think so. The two arms of Government are separate entities, hence interference is not possible. Parliament is only doing its work of checking on the performance of the Judiciary. It (Judiciary) should do its work in a manner acceptable to Kenyans.
QUESTION: Do you think Imanyara, who has already filed substantive Motion, will convince Parliament that there is reason to discuss the personal conduct of the three judges?
ANSWER: There are many MPs who will support the Motion. The requisite number will be easily raised. The aim is to discipline the judges and show Kenyans that the judgement was wrong. It should be a lesson to avoid similar cases in coming years because we want our judicial system to be respected.
QUESTION: There is a feeling in some quarters that Imanyara's move is retrogressive. Comment.
ANSWER: No, the move is not retrogressive, but is meant to save the country to ensure we get a new constitution come the August 4 national referendum. The country is bigger than the three judges, and anybody trying to stifle efforts to achieve a new constitution should be stopped. We should pass the Proposed Constitution after over two decades of struggle and concentrate on other development issues.
QUESTION: Do you agree with arguments that the ruling of the case, which was concluded 14 months ago, may have been intended to sway public opinion on the referendum?
ANSWER: Yes, I totally agree. The judgement raises many questions. There are some anti-reformists who may be out to use the Judiciary to achieve their objectives.
QUESTION: Do you support the move by Attorney General Amos Wako to appeal against the ruling?
Yes I do. He is the Government legal adviser and the move is part of his mandate. As indicated by the AG, the ruling should come before we go for the referendum to avoid any confusion over the matter.
What is your independent view on the inclusion of Kadhi Courts in the Constitution?
Kadhi Courts are in the current Constitution; hence it does not matter being in the Proposed Constitution. I do not think they will hinder Christians from worshipping. I also believe they entrench freedom of worship. Their inclusion in the Proposed Constitution will not hamper its passage.
NO: Saboti MP Eugene Wamalwa
QUESTION: Do you support the planned Motion of censure on the three judges in Parliament?
ANSWER: No, I do not support the planned censure Motion. I think the AG's reaction is more appropriate because if anyone is aggrieved, dissatisfied or even outraged by any decision or opinion of the High Court, then they are entitled to challenge the same in a higher court, which is the Court of Appeal.
QUESTION: Is the Motion not interference on the independence of the Judiciary as an organ of Government?
ANSWER: As both a lawyer and lawmaker, I am a firm believer in the doctrine of separation of powers. I believe the censure Motion would amount to interference on the independence of the Judiciary, as it would create a state of affairs where judges would be intimidated and would not make independent decisions without looking over their shoulder.
QUESTION: Do you think Imanyara, who has already filed substantive Motion, will convince Parliament that there is reason to discuss the personal conduct of the three judges?
ANSWER: I wish not to speculate or anticipate debate over this issue. Time will tell.
QUESTION: There is a feeling in some quarters that Imanyara's move is retrogressive. Comment.
ANSWER: I don't believe the Motion is retrogressive, but perhaps is unnecessary at this time as it will only lead to a further diminution of respect for an institution that already does not command the full respect and confidence of all Kenyans. In my humble view, we should be focusing more on constitutional and institutional reforms instead of exposing their weaknesses.
QUESTION: Do you agree with arguments that the ruling of the case, which was concluded 14 months ago, may have been intended to sway public opinion on the August 4 national referendum?
ANSWER: I believe what has sparked public outrage is the timing of the ruling coming after six years and on the eve of a referendum, which has given credence to arguments that is was intended to sway the public opinion. But I am also aware of the serious problem of backlog of cases and shortage of judges that needs to be addressed urgently. It may not have been deliberate.
Do you support the move by Attorney General Amos Wako to appeal against the ruling?
Yes I do and also urge that the appeal be determined on a priority basis as it is a matter of great public interest and national importance.
What is your independent view on the inclusion of Kadhi Courts in the Constitution?
I believe many Kenyans have had no problems with Kadhi Courts though they did not have a say over the matter at Independence. However, whether or not to have Kadhi Courts in the new constitution is in their hands.
Source: The Standard | Online Edition
0 comments:
Post a Comment