As vetting approaches and the potentially high number of judicial officers likely to face the ‘phase 2’ purge… lawyers are falling over each other trying to polish their résumés in the hope of filling up the already empty slots as well as the soon to be vacancies.
Hence begs the questions, are these legal practitioners (even with their impressive résumés) going to qualify for these positions? Are they really going to prove that they are persons of integrity? Are we likely to get a fresh deluge of ‘wikileakes’ discrediting their claims as persons of integrity?
I have no doubt that many in my profession are persons who conduct their businesses either in private practice, public service or civil society with the highest level of integrity…..but then how many???
As I read the Article is The Standard on confessions of how a lawyer helps pirates ‘clean’ their money….I was left asking my self thought provoking questions as to how many lawyers today would pass the Constitution’s Chapter 3 test of on leadership and integrity.
The recently published Vetting Bill that seeks to establish the Vetting Board will among other things have the power to gather relevant information, including requisitioning of reports […] and to compel the production of such information as and when necessary….as provided for in Article 14 (1) (a) of the Bill.
Apart from the constitutional threshold, the board will seek to establish; competence and diligence, complaints by the public and other bodies e.g. the LSK etc, intellectual Capacity, legal judgment, consistent honesty and high moral character, […] – Article 18 of the Bill.
And so I wonder, if the number of likely casualties from the judiciary as a result of the threshold set out, among current judicial officers, from the top of my head is anything to go by, who will remain on the judiciary considering the revelations in the public domain on their conduct as well as by an interesting report on the integrity of the judiciary? And further more, if the same is to be applied to persons in the profession seeking to join the bench, who will ‘hack’?!?! The state of the profession has been aptly laid bare on several occasions.
The number of complaints received by the Advocates complaints commission is appalling and is fast on the rise and is certainly old news.
Will we really have a judiciary after the vetting? All the ambitious plans by the judiciary will certainly come to not if there are no Kenyan lawyers capable of filling up these positions or who shy away from pursuing these positions due to the skeletons in their closets!
There is need to preach that there is nothing wrong for the word lawyer to be put alongside words like ethical, integrity, honest, morally upright etc. Having such words to describe you as a lawyer does not necessarily make you a saint, it just makes you what in essence you ought to be before putting on a lawyers cap….a good person! Am sure we have many good people in the profession, are you……..
I am an optimist at heart. I am also a realist. I realise that before we can claim a successful vetting of the judiciary, we, as professionals, must set our house in order. The manner in which the LSK has been Balkanised is shocking. Images of the Chairman and the Secretary hurling abuses at each other and stories of the Council divided along tribal (yes, I said it) and political lines give the lie to the assertion that members of 'good' standing are qualified to occupy empty seats on the Bench. If professionals like lawyers cannot even police integrity issues among themselves, how do we expect them to occupy judicial posts with any modicum of decency or integrity? Reform the LSK before it can purport to reform the Judiciary. Get the horse first, then buy the cart!
ReplyDeletenice article aguy
ReplyDeletethanks Sam
ReplyDeletethanks Maundu, wouldn't agree more...