A day after criticizing the High Court over the decision to stop the appointment of the 50 Chief Administrative Secretaries, Nandi County Senator Samson Cherargei has directed his guns on Chief Justice Martha Koome.
The seemingly infuriated UDA legislator took on the Chief Justice, demanding her track record and her performance in Judiciary.
Through a post on his Twitter page, the angry senator blasted the CJ, saying the judiciary must be accountable to Kenyans. He said he will not stop his attacks on the law body, saying it is not an exclusive club.
“Who has a track record of Chief justice Martha Koome under-Performance in Judiciary? Judiciary must be accountable to Kenyans it is NOT an exclusive club !.Share here !Musilete story za jaba !.” he lamented
Initially, the senator had blasted the courts, saying they had initially ruled that the Government could appoint 23 CASs but on Monday, the same courts ruled that the appointment of CASs is unconstitutional.
According to Cherargei, this will erode the integrity and public confidence of judicial processes in the country.
In a recent ruling, a three-judge bench of the High Court found that the establishment of 50 Chief Administrative Secretary (CAS) positions by President William Ruto was unconstitutional due to non-compliance with the law. The decision has ignited a heated debate surrounding public interest and the principles of natural justice.
The court’s decision came after examining a petition that highlighted the lack of public participation in the creation of these additional 27 posts, in addition to the original 23 CAS positions. The bench agreed with the petitioners, emphasizing the absence of public consultation, which is a crucial element in the democratic process.
Responding to the ruling, Senator Cherargei issued a statement expressing his disappointment in the High Court’s decision. He argued that the court failed to consider the merits of the case and instead focused solely on the constitutionality of the positions.
Cherargei further claimed that the Judiciary had received an additional 4 billion above their regular budget in the 2023-2024 fiscal year, raising concerns about the allocation of resources.
“We shall appeal this decision that negates public interest and principles of natural justice. Who will watch the watcher?” Cherargei exclaimed, raising pertinent questions about accountability and oversight.
Justices Kanyi Kimondo and Ali Visram, who formed the majority opinion, concurred that the creation of 50 CAS positions exceeded the original intention of the constitution. They stated that the framers of the constitution did not envision such a significant number of CASs, whose role is to deputize the 22 Cabinet Secretaries. This finding emphasized the importance of adhering to the constitutional principles and intent.
However, Justice Hedwig Ong’udi dissented, arguing that the decision itself was unconstitutional. Ong’udi disagreed with the majority, asserting that the creation of the 50 CAS positions was in line with the constitutional framework.
Content created and supplied by: NRMedia (via Opera
News )
