Court allows clergy case against law review
Evangelical and Indigenous churches chairman Bishop Joseph Methu (extreme right) and colleagues at the High Court. The clergy want the court to stop the constitutional review process. Photo/ PAUL WAWERU
What you need to know:
- Judges dismiss AG application saying the Constitution has empowered the High Court to hear such cases.
- Religious leaders want the review process stopped arguing that the experts were not committed to giving Kenyans a new constitution.
A group of religious leaders battling to stop the constitutional review process Friday successfully argued to be heard by the High Court.
The leaders led by the Federation of Evangelical and Indigenous churches chairman Bishop Joseph Methu convinced a three-judge bench that the High Court has powers to hear any cases where rights have been infringed or are about to.
Judges Roselyn Wendoh, George Dulu and Abida Ali-Aroni dismissed an application by the Attorney General saying the Constitution has empowered the High Court to hear such cases.
According to the AG, courts have no powers to hear a case of such nature and the process should be left to Parliament after having given out the roadmap to the review process.
The religious leaders want the review process stopped arguing that the experts were not committed to giving Kenyans a new constitution.
In January, the same leaders failed to obtain temporary orders to halt the implementation of the Constitution of Kenya (Amendment) Act.
The Act provides a road map for the review process.
Through lawyer Kibe Mungai, the religious leaders argue that the road map for the law review process under the Act was unconstitutional and therefore should not be allowed to go through.
According to them, the review Act is unconstitutional in providing for a new constitution through amendment of the Bomas and Wako drafts, which became null and void when Kenyans voted in the 2005 referendum.
The group said the review envisaged under the Act was not capable of resolving all contentious issues.
After moving to court, the AG filed an objection arguing that it was outside the court’s jurisdiction. The judges, however, said the review process was of great importance and any objection to it, should be heard before proceeding.
The AG, through lawyer Kepha Onyiso, immediately asked for permission to file an appeal.
Mr Mungai was at the same time allowed to amend his pleadings to include the Interim Independent Electoral Commission and the Committee of Experts to the Constitutional Review.
He was directed to file the amended suit within seven days and serve it to the AG.
