Uhuru Handing Over Power to Ruto Has No Constitutional Merit

I’m really amused by the excitement that is being caused by the supposed handing over of power by Uhuru to Ruto. It really amuses me that the Constitution gave the DP the powers to deputize the president right from 2010 when the new constitution was promulgated. In so far as I am concerned, the handover was pure mediocrity because Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta remains the President of the Republic of Kenya and C-in-C of the Armed Forces.  You can only act as a president when there is a void in that element which must be filled by means so established by the 2010 Constitution of the Republic of Kenya. None of the conditions was fulfilled to qualify that handover as legally binding in defining who an Acting President is. So as of now, Ruto is ‘legally purporting to be the Acting President’ of the Republic of Kenya.

What Kenyans should know is that Uhuru is a smart politician who has studied the art of power in the name of Political Science at Boston University. He is adept at creating impressions which I must say hold sway with the masses and he has chipped away Agwambo’s bedrock of populist politics. What he is waiting for is to count the number of new converts in the name of votes in 2017. This handing over the instruments of power is a sham which is legally irreconcilable but politically palpable and tasty. Constitutionally, it can only happen when he is not able to discharge his duties as the President of the Republic of Kenya. Take note, being under pressure to answer charges of crimes against humanity doesn’t imply incapacitation to discharge his duties as President. He made the promise while campaigning.

Some fellow might question me and challenge me to state if Uhuru can govern the country while he is answering charges of crimes against humanity. My answer is, during campaigns he made that promise, and so far he has made more than 29 official visits to other countries since he came to power. He has spent more than four days away on some of this trips and he never ever handed over power to Ruto to act as an Acting President when he was away. My question is, according to the Constitution, the DP can only become an acting President if he takes the Oath in the presence of the Chief Justice.

If my facts are wrong, I stand to be corrected.

The handing over of the sword was a scam to hoodwink Kenyans that indeed the President was going to The Hague as an individual without the vestiges of the Presidency. It is true he is facing a personal case in the matter distinct from his role as the Head of State and C-in-C of the Armed Forces of Kenya, a critical element that defines the presidency. I laugh at the facebook posts that show Ruto proclaiming his loyalty to the President of the Republic of Kenya. This two play masters know how to get the most out of their ICC troubles. They have turned it into a political asset.

My opinion is that the handover had no constitutional force behind it and it was a mere ceremony of glitter and pomp. I muss and ask myself for the more than twenty something times Uhuru has been out of the Country, I have never witnessed him hand over power, and hand over power to what? Constitutionally that was a case of inconsequent outcomes at law. Baseless by all means in the legal spheres, but fruitful to their political mechanizations. Despite this I think the fellow who moved to Court seeking to determine the constitutionality of the handover is wasting time. Ruto was sworn in to deputize the president in 2013 and that is exactly what he is doing despite the ‘bad manners of handover ceremony.’

What does the constitution say about the inauguration of an Acting or Full time president? For that to satisfy the constitutional threshold, it must be done in a public place such as Kasarani Safaricom or Coke-cola Nyayo Stadia, or Uhuru Gardens, even Uhuru Park can do.  It cannot be in the privacy of Harambee House or State House. For one to act as president the incumbent must have been impeached, dead, mentally incapacitated, or has resigned, or by any other reason at law that makes him forfeit the presidency. So, for Uhuru to be out of the country, it does not mean Ruto can act as a president, he will continue deputizing the president despite being fooled with that Sword.

In his ‘acceptance speech’ purporting to accept the honour  of being president, Ruto made a silly joke of himself, he exhibited sycophancy on facebook that are relics of his Moi era rise to stardom. May be it will work out for him in his bid for State House in 2022, but he must be careful to note Agwambo will not be in that challenge by then, and a new entrant will come into power. He is bound to run for his money. Ruto may be cursed to being the kingpin game changer of the political landscape without ever being the king, just like Agwambo. Only time will tell if he can actually take the presidential oath of office after winning a general election and not just filling a non-existent gap in law when his superior is in court answering allegations of rape, murder, and forced displacement of people.

I therefore advance my opinion, this handover  is a farce in legal perspectives, but a clever political ploy to create the impression matters at The Hague are so serious that for Uhuru to be out of the country he must ‘handover power’ to Ruto because there will be a power vacuum. I qualify that as pure nonsense. If the DP is not there, the Speaker of the National Assembly can take over, if the Speaker is not there, The Chief Justice, if the Chief Justice is not there, what the hell will the cabinet be doing? Can you Kenyans please revisit your Constitution and read it! This handover is pragmatically legal nonsense, but a serious political mileage for the Two Boys, Uhuru and Ruto, and a dirty scar on perpetual campaigner Agwambo.

Do you see why it is dangerous not to pay your dues? I can’t edit your work and you start bothering me over a few K. Watch this, I edited this statement someplace

The study made the following recommendations;

Parliament to re-evaluate the Alcoholic Drinks Control Act and align it with socio-economic needs, capacities and expectations of the poor.

Undertake civic education and encourage alcoholics to undergo rehabilitation in to lead to a positive change from alcohol taking behaviors rather than use the law enforcement agencies to curb alcoholism

Develop socio-economic policies and strategies for the empowerment of women with alcoholic husbands to make them more economically productive to enhance the provision of quality care to their children and families.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s