Is the LSK taking advantage of Ruto’s gesture to rebuild its profile?

By: Joseph Mutua Ndonga

Worth Noting:

• We recall that during the era of former President Uhuru Kenyatta, the LSK was in various occasions considered to be a thorn in his establishment. The situation worsened during the tenure of lawyer Nelson Havi.
• Get me right. I’m not saying what they are doing is wrong. For me, however, the timing and some of the grounds they had listed sounded more of being populism.
• This, perhaps, explains why they had lost the first case. In this suit, they were challenging Dr. Ruto’s list of nominees for the positions of the principal secretary. The list was allegedly dominated by members of two communities and so it was not reflecting the face of Kenya.

A few days ago, President William Ruto honored an invitation by the Judiciary to be a chief guest during the launch of a report touching on matters of the criminal justice system.  I had opportunity to listen to his speech and he would once again demonstrate that his fidelity to the constitution and rule of law is beyond reproach.

The President of Law Society of Kenya was among those in attendance. At one point, Dr. Ruto stated. I can see the President of LSK is here? As you are aware, the other day he took us-the government- to court.

We had no problem because we are a responsible government that believes in the rule of law. We were ready to obey the orders whichever the outcome of this case. We however won the case and I believe the LSK boss respected and concurred with the verdict.

This is Kenya that we want to build. We in government can err. So let them do their work of oversight.

For the head of LSK and some members, this was a good gesture. By publicly recognizing their work, the president gave them the publicity they badly needed. As such, this offered them with an opportunity to build the profile of their Society. The LSK’s endgame is trying to curve a niche of being in frontline of championing the rights of Kenyans.

We recall that during the era of former President Uhuru Kenyatta, the LSK was in various occasions considered to be a thorn in his establishment. The situation worsened during the tenure of lawyer Nelson Havi.

Get me right. I’m not saying what they are doing is wrong. For me, however, the timing and some of the grounds they had listed sounded more of being populism.

This, perhaps, explains why they had lost the first case. In this suit, they were challenging Dr Ruto’s list of nominees for the positions of the principal secretary. The list was allegedly dominated by members of two communities and so it was not reflecting the face of Kenya.

But, in my view, this argument was built on quick sand and hence it was weak and shaky. There is no law compelling the President to distribute seats based on ethnic and regional considerations. He was allowed to craft his own criteria and use it to prepare a list of nominees.

But of course, the President is a politician and so you would expect him to consider all the regions. In his list, this was very clear. He had selected the nominees from 43 counties.

The LSK has filed a new case. This time they are challenging the proposals by President to amend the constitution. They have two main grounds. First, the President cannot initiate this process. Secondly, he was returning the Building Bridges Initiative [BBI] through the back door.

Yes, I remember one of the orders contained in the landmark ruling delivered by a bench of the High Court that halted the BBI, stated; the president is not allowed to initiate the process of amending the constitution.

This power is vested in the hands of an ordinary Kenyan. The judges did, however, elaborate how this can become a reality. Where will this person get the financial and other resources to popularize this initiative?

Again, they would not give a conclusive response on why the courts had failed to stop the 2010 referendum. This is because the process had been initiated President Mwai Kibaki and Prime Minister Raila Odinga and the two leaders led the grueling nation-wide campaigns for the adoption of draft constitution. This is the constitution that is governing our country today.

Though I stand to be corrected, my considered is that President Ruto is on the right course. Going by the opinions of some of the legal experts, the President has not broken any law. He is free to present his proposals if he preferred the changes to be considered through parliamentary process. The other method is popular initiative and this is the one that he cannot initiate.

Then, it is believed there is this clause that states. This constitution can only be amended after 10 years.  It is now 12 years old and so Dr Ruto is within the law.

Joseph Mutua Ndonga is a Writer and Political Analyst based in Nairobi