Let state not heckle the Judiciary, but allow due process
Opinion
By
Mike Nyagwoka
| Jan 06, 2024
While it is true the Judiciary may need some reforms, reasons advanced by the President form the weakest argument.
President William Ruto seemed more concerned about injunctions and orders putting a brake on some state programmes, including implementation of the new Social Health Insurance Fund.
He has made it look like if only that small matter was resolved, then the Judiciary would be completely okay. This is obviously a selfish argument that only wants to assume the Judiciary should exist to serve the state's agenda.
This argument ignores the fact that the Judiciary exists for the exact purpose he is arguing against; to put a stopper on any institution that wants to abuse its powers over the people.
It also ignores the fact that the Judiciary is the last guard against abuse of the supreme law, the Kenyan Constitution.
READ MORE
Kenya faces pressure to meet AFCON 2027 hosting demands
Ruto to represent Africa at G7 summit amid push for financial reforms
Ruto's vitriolic outbursts have brought the Presidency into disrepute
Sibling rivalry: Moses Kuria, his brother clash over Juja MP seat
Hard questions as 4th international investment conference draws close
EACC warns against use of public resources in campaigns
State orders another security operation in cattle rustling prone counties
A nation where insults speak louder than policies ever could
Lowering the bar: Has Ruto discarded Executive decorum in bid to outdo Gachagua?
It is unfortunate that the President is not expressing worry about how slowly the wheels of justice seem to grind. It is unfortunate the President is not worried about the number of corruption suspects who have abused the justice system to keep their cases pending for years.
The president should be most worried about the hustlers who cannot access the justice system or have failed to find justice as their matters drag in court for years.
Sometimes in December, there was a story that captures the real frustration of the lands courts.
It was about an old man in Bungoma who had spent 44 years in court over the ownership of a piece of land he claimed to have acquired in his youth.
For a case to last 44 years, you can guess the intrigues that accompanied it: loss of files, postponements, changes of magistrates, etc. Even without being privy to details of the case, the fact that the matter lasted that long is already a clear injustice to all parties.
Yet, this is not an isolated matter but just a drop in the ocean. Many have died while pursuing justice in court. Shouldn't this be the worry of everyone?
Even with its imperfections, the Judiciary has remained the last refuge for Kenyans - as the Legislature continues to lose its teeth. This is where civil society ran to and put a stopper on the BBI process as the judges reiterated the supremacy of the Constitution and the people above the president. If there are ever going to be any reforms, they should be towards strengthening its independence and enhancing its pace.
Unlike the rest of us, the state cannot just heckle the Judiciary when it feels dissatisfied with its decisions. I even wonder why state officers would heckle the Judiciary when most decisions tend to favour it eventually.
If there are any doubts, the Constitution and the accompanying laws of the land are very clear on legal processes. The space of the Judicial Service Commission must be guarded if not reformed for the better.
-The writer is anchor Radio Maisha