Ruto bid for top job jolted

By Judy Ogutu.

Higher Education Minister William Ruto's presidential ambition was jolted after the court ruled he should face fraud charges.

The minister will now have to put up a legal battle with a view to being cleared of the charges before the 2012 General Election because the Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Act disqualifies people facing criminal charges from holding public office.

This could prove tricky because such cases have been known to drag on in courts. Chapter Six of the new Constitution raises the bar on the integrity of those seeking public office.

In yesterday’s ruling, the constitutional court declared Ruto would now have to face the Sh96million fraud charge against him. Gichugu MP Martha Karua immediately threw the challenge to Prime Minister Raila Odinga to clear the air as to whether Ruto — who is the PM’s deputy in ODM — would resign from the Cabinet.

Karua said Raila had a fortnight ago defended Ruto in Parliament, saying he could not step aside because he had filed a constitutional motion at the High Court challenging the case.

"Now that the case has been thrown out and Ruto is supposed to face a criminal trial in court, the PM should tell Kenyans what else he would defend him with," she added.

Karua said it was not just Ruto who should step aside, but all those in the Cabinet who could have been convicted.

"There are others in Cabinet who have been convicted of economic crimes who should be out pursuant to the Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Act," she added.

The former Justice and Constitutional Affairs minister had clashed with Raila in Parliament over the issue, demanding that the PM tells the House why the Eldoret North MP had not resigned in light of the new Constitution yet he was facing charges in court. But, responding, Raila said he was aware Ruto had challenged the charges.

Opinion was last night divided within the legal fraternity on whether Ruto should continue serving as a Cabinet minister following the High Court order that the Sh96million case against him proceeds.

Senior counsel, Paul Muite, said the issue at hand was not an issue of law, but that of public morality.

"Until and unless Ruto is convicted, he cannot lose his seat. It is an issue of values we share as Kenyans. You can drive with your flag to court and it will continue like that," he said.

Ruto, he added, can continue serving as a Cabinet minister and he would not be the first one to do so.

"It is not right. It is very wrong, but those are the values imposed on the people (of Kenya) by the ruling class," he added, in a telephone interview with The Standard On Saturday.

Moral obligation

Another advocate, Peter Kaluma said Ruto should leave office as a matter of principle.

"Whether or not he would do so is a matter of personal choice. The right thing is that he should leave office as a matter of moral obligation," Kaluma said. However, he noted that any individual is presumed innocent until proved guilty.

"When you look at the Constitution in greater detail you may not compel him to leave office. You cannot be hounded out of office simply because someone went and said you stole," he said.

Yet another advocate, Moses Kurgat said the law was clear and that as a leader, one is not allowed to engage in financial impropriety, adding that Ruto should not hold public office any more.

"Squarely without looking for any legal reason, Chapter Six on Leadership and Integrity is clear. You do not have to look for anything else. The law as it is now, it is applying now," he said.

He was, however, quick to point out that there could be an argument about when the offence was committed and what the provision of the law was at the time. MPs allied to Ruto led by Belgut MP Charles Keter, his Eldoret South counterpart, Peris Simam, and Jackson Kiptanui (Keiyo South), rushed to his defence arguing he should continue serving in office despite the court judgement.

"Let the case be heard to its conclusion so that if he is found guilty, he can step aside, otherwise he is clean until proved otherwise by the court," Keter said. Simam and Kiptanui said the issue had been politicised and that some people were allegedly working behind the scenes to have the minister’s name tarnished.

"It is all about 2012 politics and his enemies are using all tricks in the book to have him step aside before the next General Election by demonising him," she said.

Presidential Ambition

The fraud case against Ruto came up in 2004, long before the Eldoret North MP expressed presidential ambition.

Kiptanui said Ruto should continue serving in the Cabinet, as the case does not affect his duties in any way.

Konoin MP Julius Kones said if an appeal on the matter would be accepted, then the minister should continue serving in his docket.

"If I were in his position, I would step aside and set a good precedent on the face of the new Constitution. I strongly believe that time would vindicate him," Kones said.

Dr Kones said he was aware some ODM leaders had hatched a plot to push the minister out of the Cabinet.

Mosop MP David Koech said the minister should not be pushed out, as the case came up under the old Constitution.

"Even under the new and old constitution, it is clear that one is innocent until he is proved guilty in a court of law, and there is no exception to Ruto’s case," Koech said.