CJ Koome vows to promote judicial autonomy ‘ring-fenced’ in the constitution » Capital News

NAIROBI, Kenya, Aug 27 – Chief Justice Martha Koome has vowed to protect the judicial autonomy as provided for in the Constitution as Kenya marks 11 years since its promulgation.

CJ Koome said defending the Constitution is a national prerogative, and urged both the State and non-state actors to pull in the same direction so as to deliver on the promise of the Constitution.

“The inherent autonomy of judicial authority is sacrosanct. It is ring-fenced by the Constitution. We must therefore not shy away from collaboration with other actors in fear of this infringement. Defence of the Constitution is a national prerogative and I am prepared to champion it boldly and fervently,” she stated on Friday during an event to mark the eleventh anniversary since the promulgation of the Constitution.

Koome noted that there is still a challenge in ensuring that the Judiciary, constitutional commissions and independent offices are adequately resourced to enable them carry out their statutory mandate efficiently, but remained optimistic that the challenges can be addressed when the Arms of the Government and other agencies “sit together in the spirit of cooperative governance and principled dialogue”.

Despite numerous challenges of enforcement, she said that the rights of Kenyans are now generally better protected in the Constitution.

“I need to emphasize the point that is often forgotten that the Constitution establishes a value-order that regulates the State but also society. To give full effect to its promises will involve ensuring that its values radiate and permeate all spheres of our society, is owned, and claimed by all,” she said.

Koome made the remarks at a time when a section of politicians were pursuing an appeal to salvage the Building Bridges Initiative Bill at the Supreme Court.

The BBI proponents argued that the Constitution is ripe for a review, with major focus being on solving the issue of ‘winner takes it all in elections’.

Those opposed, on their part argued that among the proposed changes were contentious issues that would reverse gains made in the Constitution 2010, such as having a Judiciary ombudsman appointed by the Executive.