A lawyer has challenged Chief Justice David Maraga’s advice to the President to dissolve Parliament in court, accusing the CJ of irregularly and unlawfully advising the President.
Lawyer Adrian Kamotho Njega filed a judicial review application seeking to quash the Chief Justice’s advice to the President, pursuant to Article 261 (7) of the Constitution claiming that the advisory is tainted with illegality, irrationality and procedural impropriety.
According to Kamotho, the matter of dissolution of Parliament should be approached cautiously like hot ugali and in strict adherence to the law.
“Article 261 of the Constitution does not envisage any scenario whatsoever, where the Chief Justice is moved by a petitioner to dissolve Parliament.
CJ Maraga had said that there were six petitions before him seeking to have the Parliament dissolved.
However, the petitioner argues that Parliament was not a party to the proceedings to any of the petitions or even the appeal fomenting the advice formulated by the chief justice.
“The intention to dissolve parliament was never disclosed, published or publicized contrary to the dictates of Article 35 (3) of the Constitution, the lawyer adds.
The applicant further argues that the CJ has failed to disclose the next course of action or events that should follow upon dissolution of Parliament, thus occasioning profound anxiety to the public adding that Parliament has immense roles and an enormous legal mandate, and absence of which could grind the country to a halt.
The CJ and the AG have been named as respondents in the case whereas Parliament, Parliamentary Service Commission, Speaker of National Assembly and the Senate have been as interested parties.