No end to standoff over nominations

By Standard Team
The two parliamentary Committees tasked with disentangling Grand Coalition’s standoff on nominations to four constitutional offices have hit a dead end and attention is now back to the House Speaker Kenneth Marende.
Today, Justice and Finance Committees were to report to the House their findings on the nominees announced by President Kibaki but disowned by Prime Minister Raila Odinga. The committees were to submit reports built from investigation into what transpired, examination of written and oral evidence by relevant public officers, as well as thorough scrutiny of the Constitution and the National Accord and Reconciliation Act. Thereafter, the Speaker would have given his own ruling on whether the nomination process met the threshold of the Constitution and the National Accord as requested by the PM in his protest letter against the President.
But last evening, to the country’s shame, the possibility of the House getting reports that would not be contested or disowned by some members of the two committees was doubtful. It also looked most likely Marende’s ‘Solomonic Wisdom’ of passing off the burden of retracing flaws in the process if any, would work the magic expected of him by not hurting any of the sides to the dispute.
Furthermore, the Justice Committee voted to seek more time today, the second time it has done so in a week, even as it looked pretty obvious it is too consummated in party agenda than principles of law that are supposed to give it bearing.
As things stood, it appeared Mr Marende would have to bite the bullet and give a ruling, probably after giving the committees more time to reach consensus, but certainly not today. And if he were to do it, he may just restrict himself to constitutional issues and leave out the appropriateness or otherwise of the nominees, and refer the list back to the principals.
But with the tick of the clock, what stood out clearly was the shame and dilemma the disagreement between the President and the PM had visited on the country. That they were unable to reach consensus on their dispute — hence the decision to leave the task to the House, which itself is a mirror of their perennial differences and competing interests — scarred the wound of a country struggling with internal contradictions peppered by ethnic rivalries and political manipulation.
Impact badly
The state of the affairs, which sadly impact badly on the Judicial and Budget positions offices — whose hallmark is integrity, independence, neutrality and competence — could be summed up in two words: national disgrace!
Why? Because first of all, the four positions — Chief Justice, Attorney General, Director of Public Prosecutions and Controller of Budget — should be over and above the political actors.
They are also the cornerstone of the new Constitution, and faltering in the first step of its implementation, would inevitably reflect badly on the Kenyan leadership, and how Kenyans perceive their commitment to the new laws.
It is also incontestable that by sidestepping the Judicial Service Commission on the three judicial nominations, resorting to a this-for-me-and-that-for-you process, then finally disagreeing, the two principals have not merely made the appointments a circus, but also ridiculed offices Kenyans look up to for impartiality and independence, and probably lowered their standing as well as that of the nominees before their peers and the country at large.
That was the sad reality of Kenya standing at the junction of national disgrace last evening as the country awaited the progress of the committees and Marende’s ruling. The questions on the lip remained; Did we have to stoop this low in bowing to ethnic and political interests? Did the President and PM have to subject the country to this circus that threatens the goodwill they gained after the passage of the new Constitution? Did they expect their fractious and partisan Parliament to take the country forward once they deadlocked?
RESOLVE IMPASSE
The committees have been battling to resolve the impasse over the nomination of Justice Alnashir Visram to be CJ, Prof Githu Muigai (AG), Mr Kioko Kilukumi (DPP) and Mr William Kirwa (Budget).
Today, if Marende decides to give a ruling, whichever way his double-edged Sword of Damocles will cut, it is obvious he would do it from a difficult position because it is unlikely he would be guided by the committees’ reports.
Hopes that the Justice and Legal Affairs Committee would be of help were dashed when its ODM members came up with a new hurdle by demanding vetting of nominees for AG and DPP before they prepare the report. It is understood that on the CJ nominee, they had already agreed Justice Alnashir Visram be dropped.
However, the new demands threw the committee into a tailspin, a day after the MPs appeared to agree that nominees for the two offices be passed over to Parliament for approval. And, it did not help matters that PNU stuck to the President’s position just as the ODM group clung to the stand taken by the PM.
During the weekend retreat at Windsor, the ODM side had reportedly demanded nomination of CJ be conducted afresh despite reservations by PNU MPs, who insist ‘consultations’ between the President and PM, as envisaged in the constitution and Accord, do not necessarily have to end in agreement.
From the look of things, aspects of the contest may now boil down to a game of numbers, assuming the Speaker decides to put the matter to a vote. However on the constitutional issues, Marende was clear they would not be subject to numbers.
NATIONAL CONCERN
The tempo for this afternoon’s session, which could be turbulent but heart-breaking to the country, could be set by Raila’s chairing of ODM Parliamentary Group Meeting at Orange House. A communiquÈ from the party’s communications office indicated that "various matters of national concern" would be discussed. Sources revealed ODM MPs would be looking at options the party could use to stop the nominations.