Published on 04/01/2024
President Ruto has recently intensified his criticism of the Judiciary, attributing it to the High Court’s decisions that have put a stop to some of his key initiatives.
The most recent setback involves the suspension of social health scheme laws, following a legal challenge asserting their violation of the constitution by encroaching on essential rights of Kenyans.
Additionally, the housing levy, designed to fund the government’s ambitious plan to construct 250,000 housing units, faced a constitutional setback. The High Court deemed it unconstitutional, citing discrimination as it unjustly differentiated between individuals employed in the formal and informal sectors.
These legal impediments appear to be the focal point of President Ruto’s pointed criticisms against the Judiciary.
The courts have also stopped the intended privatisation of 11 government parastatals, the rollout of the Maisha Namba project that seeks to introduce a new digital identification system, the privatisation of the Mombasa and Lamu ports among other projects that the Kenya Kwanza government intends to implement.
Ruto has been able to push through even controversial laws through the legislature through the sheer force of his party UDA’s numbers or threats when need be.
“Kila mjumbe ajulikane amepiga kura upande gani, mimi nangojea kuona mjumbe mwenye anaenda kupiga kura kupinga mpango ya serikali ya kupatia hawa vijana, waliowapigia kura, ati ajira, I am waiting,” he previously said.
But the judiciary remains the one arm of government that isn’t dancing to his tune just yet.
The judiciary holding steadfast to the independence that the constitution grants it in article 10, which directs it to “exercise judicial authority, subject only to the constitution and the law and not to be subject to the control or direction of any person or authority” It is also guided, in exercising that independence in the principles that justice shall be done to all irrespective of status and shall not be delayed and the courts through various administrations appear to strive to uphold.
Kenya’s judiciary has gained significant independence with the enactment of the 2010 constitution that served to pry power and control of the executive over the judiciary.
Previously, the president had the power to appoint not only the chief justice of the Court of Appeal, then Kenya’s highest court but also all the members of the Judicial Service Commission, responsible for hiring and disciplining judges.
The security of tenure that now comes with the 2010 constitution has served to embolden judges to do their jobs without fear, and since then, the country’s judicial landscape has been littered with court decisions that would otherwise have appeared unthinkable.
The president’s recent and current outbursts against the Judiciary have critics worried that the Executive is attempting to return the country to the pre-2010 times, where the Judiciary was threatened and intimidated to do the Executive’s bidding.
