Claude Katata

[Larry Madowo @LarryMadowo]

Adidas honors Sabastian Sawe’s historic sub-2-hour marathon with a giant billboard at London’s iconic Piccadilly Circus

[Claude Katata @ClaudeKatata]

@georgediano Umechange lanes sawa tu.

[Claude Katata @ClaudeKatata]

@ahuja_priyank Please share

[Priyank Ahuja @ahuja_priyank]

All Paid Courses (Free for First 500 People)

𝗣𝗮𝗶𝗱 𝗖𝗼𝘂𝗿𝘀𝗲 𝗙𝗥𝗘𝗘
1. Artificial Intelligence
2. Machine Learning
3. Prompt Engineering
4. Claude, ChatGPT, Grok
5. Data Analytics
6. AWS Certified
7. Data Science
8. BIG DATA
9. Python, Power BI
10. Ethical Hacking

(72 Hours only )

Like + RT + comment 'Data’

Must Follow @ahuja_priyank so that I can DM you.

[Thuranira @Thuranira_1]

If Faith Odhiambo decides to run for the Nairobi Senator seat, Jalang’o should start dusting off his CV for Radio Jambo and Kiss FM.

[Edwin Sifuna @edwinsifuna]

Tumekua Kiambu county leo. Ahsante Thika. Ahsante Githurai.

[Faith Odhiambo @FaithOdhiambo8]

Theeka Theeka Theeka! Kwani hamjui jokes?!

All love guys! Tupatane round 2!

[Faith Odhiambo @FaithOdhiambo8]

Rūciü ni Thika. Kujeni na mbogi!

[Claude Katata @ClaudeKatata]

.
https://t.co/pLKFWoKPQ9

[Faith Odhiambo @FaithOdhiambo8]

Yesterday's High Court judgment on the impeachment of H.E. Rigathi Gachagua raises serious and legitimate questions that our constitutional jurisprudence must grapple with honestly. The three-judge bench found that the Senate violated the former Deputy President's right to a fair hearing under Article 50 of the Constitution specifically by declining to grant an adjournment when he was unable to attend the proceedings. The court acknowledged that violation, issued a declaratory order and awarded Ksh.50 million in constitutional damages. Yet the bench ultimately upheld the impeachment itself. I respect the court and the constitutional role it plays. But I believe this outcome calls for serious reflection on the coherence of our remedial framework.

The tension in the judgment lies in this, if the Senate's refusal to adjourn was a constitutional infirmity serious enough to warrant a finding of violation and a Ksh.50 million award, then the question that naturally follows is whether that infirmity was capable of tainting the entire removal process. The right to a fair hearing is not procedural decoration. It is a substantive constitutional guarantee, particularly in proceedings that result in the removal of a person from high public office. Courts must therefore grapple carefully with what it means to vindicate a right while simultaneously affirming the outcome that flowed from its violation. It is a difficult balance and I appreciate that the bench was navigating complicated constitutional terrain.

It is instructive to recall the reasoning of the Supreme Court in the landmark 2017 presidential election petition delivered by the then Chief Justice David Maraga. The court, in a 4-2 majority, nullified the presidential election not on the basis that the outcome was necessarily wrong but on the basis that the process through which it was arrived at did not conform to the Constitution and the law. The court found that irregularities and illegalities in the transmission of results had compromised the integrity of the election and that the constitutional standard required more than a plausible result, it required a process that was itself constitutionally compliant. That principle that a flawed process cannot produce a constitutionally valid outcome remains a pillar of our public law.

When we place that 2017 reasoning alongside yesterday's judgment, a legitimate concern emerges. Both cases involved constitutional violations in the course of a high-stakes removal or electoral process. In 2017, the violation of constitutional standards was sufficient to nullify the result entirely. Yesterday, a violation of the right to a fair hearing was found, remedied in damages but the result was preserved. These are not necessarily irreconcilable positions, courts do have discretion in fashioning remedies but the distinction must be clearly reasoned and transparently justified because the precedent being set will govern how future impeachments are conducted and how future courts respond to violations within those processes.

My concern is about the precedent this decision may establish. If a constitutional violation during impeachment proceedings can be remedied by damages without disturbing the outcome, future Parliaments and Senates may not feel the full weight of their constitutional obligations when handling removal proceedings. The court itself noted the urgent need for Parliament to enact a dedicated statutory framework under Article 150 governing the removal of a Deputy President which is a legislative gap that should never have existed this long. That recommendation must not be ignored. A constitutional democracy is built on the integrity of its processes not merely its outcomes. We must ensure that the right to a fair hearing in Kenya remains substantive and not merely symbolic.

[Kingpin of Kenya @ClintonObonyo]

@Mwaniki_mbui

[MethoDman @polo_kimanii]

One thing about William Ruto is hes hardworking. Everyone who has worked with him knows that. Ask jalas,jaguar and fellas like bigTed. They will tell you this brukenge does not sleep. Hes always scheming. But now the problem is,Ruto works hard in the wrong direction. Anafanya bidii kuturudisha nyuma kama nchi. You know we would rather have a lazy president who does nothing, than have a hardworking thief. What a Waste!

[Claude Katata @ClaudeKatata]

@Mosescampton Thats the point

[DismasWaTabu @DismasWaTabu]

President Ruto said something very telling. He did not say "Kenya invited the US" or "we decided together." He said "I allowed." That one word tells you everything about who really has power in Kenya.

This reminds us of what Chinua Achebe wrote in his novel "Things Fall Apart." In that book, colonizers come to Africa and do not take over by force at first. They come in slowly, they ask permission from local leaders, and the leaders think they are still in control. But over time, the foreigners gain more and more power until the local people realize they have lost their country. They become guests in their own home.

That is what Ruto's word "allowed" suggests. Kenya is not deciding anything. Kenya is just saying yes to what someone else wants. If there are 23 other facilities being built, then a much bigger American presence is taking root across Kenya.

Kenyans understand this. They see a leader saying "I allowed" instead of "we built together." They see decisions being made that affect their country but they were not part of making those decisions. This is why they are so angry. This is why they want impeachment.

It is the same feeling Achebe described: watching your own country slip away because your leaders gave permission without really understanding what was being lost. Colonialism does not always come loudly. Sometimes it comes quietly, with permission from leaders who think they are still in charge.

Dismas wa Tabu. Dreaming in installments. Billed in full.

[Claude Katata @ClaudeKatata]

@ledamalekina What happened to you?

[Claude Katata @ClaudeKatata]

@mukuru101010 Both were differently beautiful.

[John-Allan Namu @johnallannamu]

Also got to sample some brilliant Kenyan music on #soulsonfire. Here’s a brief thread with the tracks:

[𝕰𝖓𝖌. 𝐎𝐤𝐚𝐫𝐚 𝐎𝐦𝐚𝐞 @OmaeOkara]

We continue delivering projects exceeding expectations.

Our work speaks for us.

We design & Build

#MPESANATION #WhoCrownedRiggy
#JipangeNaKeja CIA in Nairobi #NISIPKe Ndindi Secrets Kairo State House Gambia National ID AffordableHousing #RecordForCoffee Mapema Ndio Best

[Claude Katata @ClaudeKatata]

https://t.co/mzAeUZbh5J

[Maria Sarungi Tsehai @MariaSTsehai]

Mungu ni mwema! Nimepambana na ninyi mmepambana
I am now safe many thanks to everyone and I will talk more tomorrow
Nawapenda sana!
#TutaelewanaTu