News
Catching up with neighbours on gender parity
TAKE IT, READ IT: Vice President Kalonzo Musyoka at the launch of the Harmonised Draft Constitution. Kenyans must subject the document to public scrutiny and inexhaustible debate.
For well over two decades, Kenya has remained sharply divided as to the nature, form and content of a new constitution.
The divisions have largely been accentuated by the diversity and divergent views of the general populace, based purely on ethnic, cultural, social, economic as well as political considerations.
It is therefore with a sense of deep relief that Kenya is finally working itself out of this quagmire towards actualising the dream of more than 42 tribal groupings.
This new dawn for Kenya is happening in the backdrop of the emerging East African Federation.
It is imperative, therefore, to examine, from a comparative analysis, the place of Kenya’s new constitutional order under the new draft law for us to understand how it sits with the rest of the East African systems, from a governance, judicial and empowerment perspective.
The philosophy upon which the East African co-operation is predicated is the commonality of interests, including economics and market access, judicial and other legal processes as well as governance systems.
A major departure in respect of the Kenyan case from the rest of the regional constitutional provisions is that whereas in Kenya the prime minister shares executive power with the president, the prime ministers for instance in Rwanda and Tanzania merely “co-ordinate and supervise the functions of government agencies or ministries.”
The judiciary also has major differences.
The Kenyan draft law has securely limited to six, the number of months a retiring judge may stay on.
In sharp contrast, in Uganda, High Court judges retire at 62 or, as may be prescribed by parliament.
One may stay on to clear pending work, as in Tanzania, but peculiarly, in the Rwandan constitution unless the law otherwise provides, judges stay on for life!
The spirit of the East African Federation presupposes uniformity in institutional, administrative and legal fundamentals.
Yet at the same time it is inconceivable that the federation states couldn’t possibly find a common retirement age for the judges serving in this jurisdiction.
Quite welcome is the proposed creation of the constitutional court and the supreme court.
Indeed, Uganda already has this structure in place, and the Committee of Experts seem to have drawn from this, particularly given that Prof Frederick Ssempebwa of Uganda was seconded to the Committee to enrich its work from his immense experience.
