I will attempt; they make the argument that since the court found that the right to fair trial [non derogable/not to be limited] was violated, then the court should have declared the whole impeachment process null and void including the subsequent appointment of Kindiki......
Just like the AI judgement by Justice Chigiti, we should equally forget about the Gachagua judgement (sic) and move on. Let us assume it did not exist.
Hawa watu wanajiita wadosi wa Kenya wanacheza sana one day…Yani siku moja hungry,angry,disappointed,discontented, frustrated,furious,Kenyans will go for these Judges,Cabinet Secretaries,MPs , Governors,Presidents, or any other OPPRESSOR from their hide outs and deal with them with FINALITY in pursuit for a NEW Kenya.
"Twisting the law to achieve predetermined outcome. Sad."
As Ndong said, these judges are smart enough to give semi-sane judgements that even SCORK may agree with. I am tired.
A Good Morning of reminding you that Rigathi Gachagua decision is a clear case of JUDICIALIZATION OF POLITICS
How could the see a Constitutional Dilemma in Article 145(7) of the Constitution?
The Gachagua judgment is a political decision at best as it is legally absurd. The Constitution expressly provides that any decision in violation of rights void. The effect of impeachment is that the person cannot hold public office. So how does a decision in violation of rights for which the Court has awarded damages operate as a bar to running for office. Those are judicial gymnastics that reflect a captured court
Constitutional Division of our High Court holds that the Constitutional Rights of Gachagua were violated but proceeds to compensate him for the violation instead of annulling the process. The High Court has given the Court of Appeal an easy bifurcated choice: affirm the violation & nullify the impeachment or set aside the alleged violation & confirm the impeachment.
The decision of the High Court is a judicial absurdity: REDUCTIO AD ABSURDUM!
The finality under article 145 proceeds on the assumption that no right/ constitutional provision was violated. There cannot be finality if the process is flawed.
@Mongareokiro1 He didn't pray for that. Its a stupid interpretation. Nothing illegal should be conclusive and final, I dont think the 2010 supports any of the sort