When BBI Bill was approved in the National Assembly, there were numerous undertones of bribe allegations. The same scenario was witnessed when the same 2020 Constitutional Amendment Bill was ratified by the Senate.
A whatsapp Group discussion involving DP Ruto’s allies revealed that there was a package that was granted to manipulate the outcome of the parliamentary votes on the Bill.
The firebrand Gatundu South lawmaker, Moses Kuria recently told BBC that he was ready to refund the Ksh. 100,000 bribe that he received from parliament. Both sides of the political divide seem to have bribed the legislators ahead of the landmark parliamentary vote.
High court issued a ruling on Thursday, declaring the constitutional amendment as illegitimate. In a rejoinder, BBI secretariat implored court to consider the public mood over its verdict that termed BBI Bill as unconstitutional.
In his ruling Justice Jairus Ngaah cited: “A constitutional amendment can be initiated by a Parliamentary or Popular initiative. It’s clear that BBI Bill is an initiative of the President. The President is not an MP and cannot directly purport to initiate a constitutional amendment."
The 2010 Constitution of Kenya gave the public more power with regard to constitutional amendment, hence the need for adequate public participation based on a popular initiative.
Justice Ngaah’s verdict terminates the case that was filed at the court determined from 17 questions in consolidated petitions. The petitioners argued that there was minimal public participation.
The Court subjected BBI to a further legal hurdle when it regarded BBI Constitutional Amendment Bill as an initiative of the president. The Court’s verdict coincided with the timing of the suspension of Kiharu MP Ndindi Nyoro from Parliament for four days.
Nyoro was suspended after he called MPS traitors, conmen and sellouts following the popular BBI Bill vote in Parliament. Nyoro alleged that legislators voted using their ‘stomachs’. His verbal outburst prompted National Assembly Speaker Justin Muturi to eject him from the House.
BBI was on the final lap of authorization after it was approved in the Bicameral House. Its ratification had paved way for a national plebiscite. The will of the people participating in the referendum is final to the effects of its legality.
Shocking Revelations regarding BBI Constitution Amendment Bill
The Building Bridges Initiative (BBI) was a creation of President Uhuru Kenyatta and opposition leader Raila Odinga. The initiative was solely meant to pacify the relationship between the scions of two top independent leaders – Jomo Kenyatta and Oginga Odinga.
BBI report has been shrouded in numerous behind-the-curtain intrigues. The report has been changed so many times to balance the goodies guided by the whims of its protagonists. It was once claimed that the BBI Bill that was presented to the National Assembly was distinct from the one presented to Senate.
BBI divide has widened the scope of deep-seated rivalry between President Uhuru Kenyatta and Deputy President William Ruto. Ruto has gone to the extent of terming BBI conversation as a non-priority matter for Kenyans.
Shocking details indicate that National Opposition whip Junet Mohamed failed to sign all the pages of the BBI report. His failure to sign all the pages gave State House operatives, under the auspices of Nancy Gitau, chance to doctor its content.
Nancy Gitau is among Uhuru Kenyatta’s handlers that are allegedly tasked with influencing Uhuru’s succession after the expiry of his two-term presidency. It is purported that Ms Gitau was the one who influenced the nomination of Martha Koome as the Chief Justice of Kenya.
Raila was shocked to receive a different version of the report at Kisii. The report that he jointly launched with Uhuru at Bomas was quite different from the one he received at Kisii State Lodge.
State House operatives were keen to monitor the enraged Odinga. As Raila was still wallowing over the passage of the Bill in County Assemblies, State House operatives chose to hire lawyers to thwart any attempt of legal obstruction.
Comments
Post a Comment