OOO,
But now you introduce a very interesting (but divisive) point and I request your interpretation:
If a member of the cabinet is suspected of, but is not accused in a court of law of: taking money from the public for the acquisition of a company and later converts it to family property, or represented by a member of his family, is suspected of selling a strategic food crop to a neighbouring country, having acquired acccess by virtue of his position, or is implicated in the loss of national reserves of oil....the list goes on. How do we deal with this kind of politician is not accused in a court of law, while conventional wisdom and word on the ground confirms the above?
From: Okiya Omtatah Okoiti <omtatah@yahoo.com>
To: mlalahoi@googlegroups.com; youngprofessionals_ke@googlegroups.com
Sent: Wed, 20 October, 2010 15:14:57
Subject: Re: The Rule of Law under the New Constitution.
Jaduong Maduong Aduong Jagem,
I hope you are keeping well. Thanks for the many contributions you make, some of which I read with keen interest.
Kindly, allow me to correct a slight error in this post. The new Constitution does not say:
The Constitution also states clearly, that, a person mentioned in a Corruption case, which is before a Court of law, if that person is holding a Government office, he/she must resign.
The fact is that the law that says that has been with us since 2003.
Section 62(1) of the Anti Corruption and Economic Crimes Act, 2003, categorically states: "A public officer who is charged with corruption or economic crime shall be suspended, at half pay, with effect from the date of the charge."
According to the Act, "'public officer' means an officer, employee or member of a public body, including one that is unpaid, part-time or temporary." That definition covers both politicians and civil servants, and does not distinguish elective from appointive offices. Meaning even MPs and councillors must be suspended once charged.
Unfortunately:
1. Section 62(5) gives power to prosecute to the AG. Private prosecutions require the approval of a court. With our political AG this law has become a political tool, not the blind maiden of justice that it ought to be. That is why many corrupt characters, including those adversely mentioned in Government reports, roam free secure in the knowledge that they won't be prosecuted for political reasons.
2. Section 62(6) states: "This section does not apply with respect to an office if the Constitution limits or provides for the grounds upon which a holder of the office may be removed or the circumstances in which the office must be vacated." Meaning, constitutional office holders enjoy immunity under this section, and since Ruto held a constitutional office, the President could not have fired him under 62(1) because of the case in court... but because of Article 73 of the Constitution on Leadership and Integrity.
This is where Dr. Barack Abonyo's concerns, that other corrupt characters are sitting poretty in public office, come in. Many top officials and politicians fail the integrity test. The Constitution does not say that only those facing court cases fail the integrity test. I posit that anybody who has been implicated in corruption fails the integrity test until cleared by the courts. It has nothing to do with being perceived innocent until proven guilty; it has a lot to do with being beyond reproach like Caesar's wife. Public officers are supposed to be above reproach; thier integrity should never be in question.
Article 27. (1) of the new Constitution states: "Every person is equal before the law and has the right to equal protection and equal benefit of the law." Since the president has acted on Ruto, he should proceed to the rest.
Over to Kibaki: Clean out The Augean Stables!
My kindest regards and Happy Mashujaa Day everybody.
Omtatah
From: Jagem K'Onyiego <jairuschurch@yahoo.com>
To: mlalahoi@googlegroups.com; youngprofessionals_ke@googlegroups.com
Sent: Tue, October 19, 2010 5:22:03 PM
Subject: The Rule of Law under the New Constitution.
Ladies and Gentlemen(s)
Since Hon Ruto was told by the Judges that he has a case to answer in Court Concerning a parcel of land that he and others participated in selling to a certain firm, where the sellers ended up raking Millions of Shillings, money that lawfully should not have gone to their pockets, many people have come into the Forum with Very interesting postings.
A number of them have come with Daggers drawn in defense of Ruto, while others have posted their thoughts, which clearly show that they are ululating, about Ruto, a Minister, being brought to answer charges in a Court of Law. While this has gone on, I see those for and against Ruto, at times to tend to be very emotional and passionate. This maybe so, but we must remember that, a few things have changed since the introduction of the new Constitution.
The New Constitution promised to protect the individual rights of the Citizens. A section in that Constitution also promises the Citizens that it will fight and protect them from Corrupt individuals. The Constitution also states clearly, that, a person mentioned in a Corruption case, which is before a Court of law, if that person is holding a Government office, he/she must resign.
The above is what the constitution provides. Now, Ruto's case goes against all these clauses and therefore what is befalling him is as the Law demands.
If all Walalahoi and YPs respected the law to be impartial in this New Constitutional dispensation, then all should have kept quiet and waited for the law to take its course. It is only in this way that Sanity will come back to Kenya. Haven't the Citizens had enough melodrama, with "Chest thumping individuals", who often, operated like they were immune to and above the law? Would we want that situation to continue or would we want to see some sobriety about the rule of law set in?
Over to you Forumists
Jagem
--
TO ADVERTISE HERE, SEND KSH 500 to +254 726 034 530
NEXT SOCIAL MEETUP http://on.fb.me/dafJDE
TECHMTAA BLOG: http://www.techmtaa.com/
To unsubscribe from this group, Email mlalahoi+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
Websites for Ksh 10,000? Email robertnng@gmail.com
--
TO ADVERTISE HERE, SEND KSH 500 to +254 726 034 530
NEXT SOCIAL MEETUP http://on.fb.me/dafJDE
TECHMTAA BLOG: http://www.techmtaa.com/
To unsubscribe from this group, Email mlalahoi+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
Websites for Ksh 10,000? Email robertnng@gmail.com
No comments:
Post a Comment