A former Presidential advisor has questioned President Uhuru Kenyatta's motive in rejecting appointment of 41 judges as recommended by Judicial Service Commission.
The JSC forwarded 41 members to State House for approval but President Uhuru Kenyatta rejected them over claims that some had questionable integrity.
But Abdikadir Mohamed, a former legal and constitutional advisor to Uhuru, says the head of state was given a wrong advise over the matter.
According to the former Mandera East MP, the president has no role in rejecting the names, adding that he should have appointed them then petition JSC.
“It couldn’t be that all the 41 nominees have issues. What was hard in taking the adverse information to the JSC? This (citing reasons against the appointment once the JSC has submitted the names) is not provided for. Why all the 41? It’s an attempt to cheapen the independence of the judiciary,” says Abdikadir, who in 2010 chaired the Parliamentary Select Committee on the Constitution.
“There is a war on the Judiciary which is not proper. Financial independence and creation of a JSC to run the affairs of the Judiciary were two issues introduced in the Constitution to protect its independence. These are coming under a lot of strain,” he explains.
Lawyer Otiende Amollo said the President’s role in the appointment of judges was largely ceremonial.
“While there may be reasons, some of them legitimate, as to why the President may have reservations about certain nominees, he has no option where the Constitution requires him to act,” he says.
Uhuru has been frequently accused of interfering with the independence of the judiciary, with the rejection of the names and trimming of the budget being some of controversial issues.