|
|
Post by mangai on Jan 19, 2012 18:22:51 GMT 3
www.nation.co.ke/business/news/Njiraini+named+new+KRA+boss/-/1006/1310362/-/33hwu8/-/index.htmlFinance Minister Uhuru Kenyatta has appointed John Njiraini as the new Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA) Commissioner General, the tax body board announced on Thursday. John Njiraini was the authority's Commissioner of domestic taxes and was pivotal in ensuring Kenyan members of Parliament were finally looped into the tax paying bracket. He replaces the outgoing Michael Waweru. The post of Commissioner of domestic taxes has now be taken by Pancrasius Nyagah. The KRA board, which is concluded interviews on Thursday, forward Njiraini's name to the Finance minister for ultimate appointment. (READ: Uhuru to have final say on who becomes next KRA boss) Mr Njiraini's appointment comes a day after Consumers Federation of Kenya (Cofek) went to court on seeking orders to stop the Kenya Revenue Authority board and the ministry of finance from recruiting a new Commissioner-General as the current hiring process “is shrouded in mystery.” On Wednesday, High Court Judge Isaac Lenaola certified the case as urgent and directed the parties to appear in court on Friday for the hearing. Cofek wants interviews of the seven short-listed candidates to be conducted in open sessions. The decision by the KRA board to conduct the interviews- which commenced on Monday- in closed session, is unconstitutional, unjustified and unreasonable, Cofek argues.
|
|
|
|
Post by adongo23456 on Jan 19, 2012 19:34:23 GMT 3
Folks,
Does this not amount to contempt of court? Are these people trying to cicurmvent the court proceedings so that when they appear in court tomorrow they can say the case has been overtaken by events? How about if the court rules in favour of the applicants and orders a new process? Do these people knwo that this kind of case can be filed even after an appointment has been made? Why would they want to provoke the judge in such an aggressive way?
Is Uhuru really ready for another tussle with the courts just after being told he broke the law with the budget?
Uhuru should be told he cannot bring muthamaki operations in the government? Kenya is not a monarchy run by a muthamaki.
Lets wait and see what Judge Lenaola will say tomorrow. He is not a pushover kind of guy. I don't know why Uhuru and company want Njiraini to start with a cloud over his head. But then again that is the way some of these chaps work. We will see how this goes.
|
|
|
|
Post by job on Jan 19, 2012 19:43:53 GMT 3
Adongo,Good gracious! I didn't even realize there was a court case underway. This now boils down to sheer impunity and a false sense of entitlement by the BOSS. Isn't this the mta do nini attitude in full display? I had actually penned my thoughts in a seperate thread - I'll just add it below: Kenyatta appoints Njiraini new KRA boss; taking over from Waweru.www.nation.co.ke/business/news/Njiraini+named+new+KRA+boss/-/1006/1310362/-/33hwu8/-/index.htmlAs our economy grew, tax collection was expected to grow in commensurate fashion. It has not, thanks to massive tax evasion and shenanigans run by a powerful, politically-connected cartel at KRA. The neutral consumer watch-dog, the Consumers Federation of Kenya, warned that only an outsider would break the current cartel within the existing rotten KRA & Customs Department. Uhuru Kenyatta on the other hand, had other ideas – more of the same at KRA! Barclays Bank’s Aden Mohammed, a complete outsider, was a front-runner for this job – expected to bring in higher private sector ethics into KRA. He would have also injected regional and ethnic equity balance into KRA, an organization whose leadership is conspicuously dominated by the Finance Minister & President’s kin. Uhuru Kenyatta’s secretive, closed-door hiring of a KRA establishment insider is the best proof that the more things change, the more they remain the same! Business writer, Jaindi Kisero, penned an article in the Daily Nation on January 10th, 2012, titled “Cleaning UP KRA Will be a Daunting Task”. His gist was that the transition period towards devolution and revenue sharing, required leadership from an outsider that could dismantle existing fiefdoms and cartels running shady tax and customs operations. The powerful cartel literally straddles all sectors of Kenya: issuing permits selectively and corruptly; collecting taxes selectively through bribery networks; surreptitiously running toll stations with proceeds being diverted into dark alleys; directly pilfering the customs system; running conflict-of-interest container freight stations that control smuggling of counterfeit merchandise and illicit narcotics; unscrupulously siphoning parallel VAT refund claims using fake VAT claim forms; and a plethora of such vices. With this stroke of a pen, Uhuru Kenyatta has ensured no change will be done at the KRA (at least for now).
|
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Jan 19, 2012 19:53:25 GMT 3
Folks,Does this not amount to contempt of court? Are these people trying to cicurmvent the court proceedings so that when they appear in court tomorrow they can say the case has been overtaken by events? How about if the court rules in favour of the applicants and orders a new process? Do these people knwo that this kind of case can be filed even after an appointment has been made? Why would they want to provoke the judge in such an aggressive way? Is Uhuru really ready for another tussle with the courts just after being told he broke the law with the budget? Uhuru should be told he cannot bring muthamaki operations in the government? Kenya is not a monarchy run by a muthamaki. Lets wait and see what Judge Lenaola will say tomorrow. He is not a pushover kind of guy. I don't know why Uhuru and company want Njiraini to start with a cloud over his head. But then again that is the way some of these chaps work. We will see how this goes. Adongo It would only be contempt of court if the court had stopped the process - which it did not as it only certified it as urgent and asked for inter parte hearing. Secondly, Cofek wanted the interviews to be stopped, but it would appear these had been completed before the case was filed. |
|
|
|
Post by adongo23456 on Jan 19, 2012 20:11:52 GMT 3
Folks,Does this not amount to contempt of court? Are these people trying to cicurmvent the court proceedings so that when they appear in court tomorrow they can say the case has been overtaken by events? How about if the court rules in favour of the applicants and orders a new process? Do these people knwo that this kind of case can be filed even after an appointment has been made? Why would they want to provoke the judge in such an aggressive way? Is Uhuru really ready for another tussle with the courts just after being told he broke the law with the budget? Uhuru should be told he cannot bring muthamaki operations in the government? Kenya is not a monarchy run by a muthamaki. Lets wait and see what Judge Lenaola will say tomorrow. He is not a pushover kind of guy. I don't know why Uhuru and company want Njiraini to start with a cloud over his head. But then again that is the way some of these chaps work. We will see how this goes. Adongo It would only be contempt of court if the court had stopped the process - which it did not as it only certified it as urgent and asked for inter parte hearing. Secondly, Cofek wanted the interviews to be stopped, but it would appear these had been completed before the case was filed. It all depends on what Judge Lenaola rules tommorow. Hopefully muthamaki is not going to advice his boys not to show up in court. The issue is the application was to have the interviews not just stopped but re-done and the applicants gave a very clear reason for that saying the interviews were shrouded in darkness and secrecy contrary to constitutional requirements for recruitment of state officers. If indeed the judge rules that there is a case to be heard to determine if the interviews were done secretly and that could make them unacceptable then the judge will issue an injuction against the appointment and let the matter go to a full hearing. The way Uhuru and his cronies are going about the whole thing is so predicatable. Thump your nose at the courts, undermine any judicial process, be a good thief that sneaks at night and snatches the little chicken before anybody wakes up and sit back and hope nobody finds out what you are doing. It is devious and reprehensible and the sad part that Njiraini may not be that rotten as the people we know Uhuru works with. But then again this is Uhur Kenyatta, what do you expect. They better have a very good explanation for the good judge tomorrow. The order issued by the court was for both parties to appear before the court on Friday. The judge will not be interested in knowing that the appointment has been done but rather in whether it was done properly or NOT. If it was fair enough if it wasn't the matter will go to full hearing and Njiraini will have to wait. |
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Jan 19, 2012 20:22:43 GMT 3
Adongo It would only be contempt of court if the court had stopped the process - which it did not as it only certified it as urgent and asked for inter parte hearing. Secondly, Cofek wanted the interviews to be stopped, but it would appear these had been completed before the case was filed. It all depends on what Judge Lenaola rules tommorow. Hopefully muthamaki is not going to advice his boys not to show up in court. The issue is the application was to have the interviews not just stopped but re-done and the applicants gave a very clear reason for that saying the interviews were shrouded in darkness and secrecy contrary to constitutional requirements for recruitment of state officers. If indeed the judge rules that there is a case to be heard to determine if the interviews were done secretly and that could make them unacceptable then the judge will issue an injuction against the appointment and let the matter go to a full hearing. The way Uhuru and his cronies are going about the whole thing is so predicatable. Thump your nose at the courts, undermine any judicial process, be a good thief that sneaks at night and snatches the little chicken before anybody wakes up and sit back and hope nobody finds out what you are doing. It is devious and reprehensible and the sad part that Njiraini may not be that rotten as the people we know Uhuru works with. But then again this is Uhur Kenyatta, what do you expect. They better have a very good explanation for the good judge tomorrow. The order issued by the court was for both parties to appear before the court on Friday. The judge will not be interested in knowing that the appointment has been done but rather in whether it was done properly or NOT. If it was fair enough if it wasn't the matter will go to full hearing and Njiraini will have to wait. Adongo There is no need to display your legal ignorance here. The judge cannot injunct what has already happened and cannot reverse the appointment until he rules on the matter after hearing both sides. There were no orders stopping the process issued by Lenaola so really there is nothing that he can do. The judge has already ruled that there are triable issues and that was the basis of his issuing the certificate of urgency - but he still did not stop the process. So there is nothing for him to reverse! |
|
|
|
Post by akinyi2005 on Jan 19, 2012 21:11:37 GMT 3
Interviews are started on Monday completed on Thursday, a name is fowarded to the finance minister who immediately rushes to make an appointment on the same day! All that while fully aware that there is a court case on Friday.
This disturbing scenario is akin to the midnight swearing in....am tired.
|
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Jan 19, 2012 21:22:12 GMT 3
Fantabulous. The face of Mt. Kenya is reflected in yet another plum appointment.
|
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Jan 19, 2012 21:25:57 GMT 3
...just becausre Njiraini is a Kikuyu....but we could not even be bothered to find out who the chair of the interview board and its constitution!
|
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Jan 19, 2012 21:39:59 GMT 3
...just becausre Njiraini is a Kikuyu....but we could not even be bothered to find out who the chair of the interview board and its constitution! Kamale, in my view that's the elephant in the room on this thread. Uhuru had an opportunity to look beyond nyumba but didn't. Just because Marsden Madoka is the chair doesn't mean a fair choice was made. I thought we've just learned that being the number one candidate isn't the end all & be all. Some of these posts need to start reflecting the true face of Kenya, not just one region, irrespective of how large it may be. Bring on the quotas... |
|
|
|
Post by job on Jan 19, 2012 21:48:09 GMT 3
...just becausre Njiraini is a Kikuyu....but we could not even be bothered to find out who the chair of the interview board and its constitution! Kamale, in my view that's the elephant in the room on this thread. Uhuru had an opportunity to look beyond nyumba but didn't. Just because Marsden Madoka is the chair doesn't mean a fair choice was made. I thought we've just learned that being the number one candidate isn't the end all & be all. Some of these posts need to start reflecting the true face of Kenya, not just one region, irrespective of how large it may be. Bring on the quotas... |
|
|
|
Post by adongo23456 on Jan 19, 2012 22:24:46 GMT 3
Kamale,It all depends on what Judge Lenaola rules tommorow. Hopefully muthamaki is not going to advice his boys not to show up in court. The issue is the application was to have the interviews not just stopped but re-done and the applicants gave a very clear reason for that saying the interviews were shrouded in darkness and secrecy contrary to constitutional requirements for recruitment of state officers. If indeed the judge rules that there is a case to be heard to determine if the interviews were done secretly and that could make them unacceptable then the judge will issue an injuction against the appointment and let the matter go to a full hearing. The way Uhuru and his cronies are going about the whole thing is so predicatable. Thump your nose at the courts, undermine any judicial process, be a good thief that sneaks at night and snatches the little chicken before anybody wakes up and sit back and hope nobody finds out what you are doing. It is devious and reprehensible and the sad part that Njiraini may not be that rotten as the people we know Uhuru works with. But then again this is Uhur Kenyatta, what do you expect. They better have a very good explanation for the good judge tomorrow. The order issued by the court was for both parties to appear before the court on Friday. The judge will not be interested in knowing that the appointment has been done but rather in whether it was done properly or NOT. If it was fair enough if it wasn't the matter will go to full hearing and Njiraini will have to wait. Adongo There is no need to display your legal ignorance here. The judge cannot injunct what has already happened and cannot reverse the appointment until he rules on the matter after hearing both sides. There were no orders stopping the process issued by Lenaola so really there is nothing that he can do. The judge has already ruled that there are triable issues and that was the basis of his issuing the certificate of urgency - but he still did not stop the process. So there is nothing for him to reverse! How do you expect the judge to issue and injunction without hearing from both parties? Ruling without the other party can only be done in an ex-parte hearing otherwise a judge's first duty in such a situation is to listen to both parties before they decide whether there is justification to issue an injunction to the process or not. Even in ex-parte hearing if an injunction is issued the other side will be given 21 days to appeal the ruling or injunction issued. It would appear to me that an ex-parte hearing was not required in this case. For your information the judge did not determine that there are triable issues. The judge does not need that to issue a certficate of urgency. All the judge needs is reasonable grounds that there is a case to be addreseed. The Judge will not address those issues. He will listen to both parties and if he determines that there are indeed triable issues the judge will issue an order taking the matter to full trial. That is how the law works my friend. Try following what happened in the Kiplagat case when he applied to have the Tribunal process suspended until a court determines what the terms of reference for the Tribunal should be. That might help you comprehend what is going on here. Judge Muchelule could not and did not issue an injunction stopping the process (already underway) until he had from both parties and decided that there was justifiable reasons to stop the process and wait for a full hearing. That is the same case here. Judge Lenaola could not issue an injunction based on applicants concerns without hearing from the other party. It is only after he hears from the all the parties that the judge can make a determination whether something wrong could be going on and issue an injunction to stop the process until the matter is heard in court. In this case if the judge establishes that something unlawful could have happened he will issue an order to take the matter to full hearing and Njiraini would be a siting duck waiting for the full hearing on the matter. There is nothing to be reversed. If the process in the end is determined to be faulty, the product Njiraini is toast. That wil happen at the full hearing. So before you mouth off about ignorance about the law try using your brain a little more if that is OK. In any event the fact that the interview was started on Monday and completed on Wednesday and appointment made on Thursday despite a court process asking the parties to show up in court on Friday already stinks and could be very prejudicial to Uhuru's move. If the court determines that the applicant in the case has establsihed that the process was phony, that court has every right to take the matter to full hearing and it wil be upto that court to make the final call. I think this nonsense of hiding under oh it is because a Kikuyu was appointed and that is why people are complaining si getting tiresome. I would suppose that it is possible to appoint even Kikuyus to state positions following due process instead of using panys routes all the time. We will question any attempts to subvert the laws and due process in Kenya whether it is a Kikuyu, a Tobiko or whoever. |
|
|
|
Post by topnotch on Jan 19, 2012 23:27:13 GMT 3
...just becausre Njiraini is a Kikuyu....but we could not even be bothered to find out who the chair of the interview board and its constitution! Njiraini's former post was taken by Mr. Nyagah. |
|
man
Junior Member
Posts: 99
|
Post by man on Jan 20, 2012 4:24:18 GMT 3
Njiraini almost single handedly ensured that these fat-cat-greedy mps of ours complied with the provision of taxing their allowances amid all the threats and chest thumping. In one flash this brought in a whooping Ksh. 300 million. That alone, in my opinion, is a huge plus for Njiraini
|
|
|
|
Post by adongo23456 on Jan 20, 2012 4:33:26 GMT 3
Njiraini almost single handedly ensured that these fat-cat-greedy mps of ours complied with the provision of taxing their allowances amid all the threats and chest thumping. In one flash this brought in a whooping Ksh. 300 million. That alone, in my opinion, is a huge plus for Njiraini And where is the money? The M.Ps haven't paid a penny yet in taxes and Njiraini has been very silent on the alleged tax money from the M.Ps and so has been his boss Uhuru Kenyatta. It seems that was just a popularity hoax by Njiraini. The M.Ps still don't stillpayany taxes and may pay none when all is said and done. Is it any wonder Njiraini is Uhuru's choice. The elleged Kshs 300 million in taxes from M.Ps is nowhere to be seen. All hat and no cattle. Totally useless. Bure kabisa ama sio? |
|
|
|
Post by patriotism101 on Jan 20, 2012 5:14:29 GMT 3
Folks, And what is the connection between all these guys? Ernst and young- when it was called bellhouse mwangi! This is thorough networking- there was no way the process could have been fair by a long shot! Weweru was parner, Njiraini a manager and Pancrius Nyaga a tax accountant, later a tax manager at the same firm. This is beyond laughable. What is waweru trying to protect at KRA to warrant such a carefully planned succession? Iko kitu  My fifty cents. |
|
man
Junior Member
Posts: 99
|
Post by man on Jan 20, 2012 7:31:25 GMT 3
Njiraini almost single handedly ensured that these fat-cat-greedy mps of ours complied with the provision of taxing their allowances amid all the threats and chest thumping. In one flash this brought in a whooping Ksh. 300 million. That alone, in my opinion, is a huge plus for Njiraini And where is the money? The M.Ps haven't paid a penny yet in taxes and Njiraini has been very silent on the alleged tax money from the M.Ps and so has been his boss Uhuru Kenyatta. It seems that was just a popularity hoax by Njiraini. The M.Ps still don't stillpayany taxes and may pay none when all is said and done. Is it any wonder Njiraini is Uhuru's choice. The elleged Kshs 300 million in taxes from M.Ps is nowhere to be seen. All hat and no cattle. Totally useless. Bure kabisa ama sio? Whether or not the tax money was actually paid is really not Njiraini's problem or duty. He dutifully played his part and others also need to play theirs. I am just giving credit where I think it is due. |
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Jan 20, 2012 8:53:07 GMT 3
...just becausre Njiraini is a Kikuyu....but we could not even be bothered to find out who the chair of the interview board and its constitution! Njiraini's former post was taken by Mr. Nyagah. 3 top posts were up for grabs. One goes to Njiriaini the other to Nyagah. The third went to a Ms. Memo who given name change at marriage can easily be from anywhere. Just when are we going to implement "reflecting the face of Kenya"? After March 2013 elections? Add to that Marsden Madoka being UK's brother-in-law (he was categorical that this is not a constitutional office & not all posts need be filled via vetting) & the Ernst & Young connection, it's clear that cronyism is alive & well in KE. |
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Jan 20, 2012 8:55:19 GMT 3
Adongo There is no need to display your legal ignorance here. The judge cannot injunct what has already happened and cannot reverse the appointment until he rules on the matter after hearing both sides. There were no orders stopping the process issued by Lenaola so really there is nothing that he can do. The judge has already ruled that there are triable issues and that was the basis of his issuing the certificate of urgency - but he still did not stop the process. So there is nothing for him to reverse! How do you expect the judge to issue and injunction without hearing from both parties? Ruling without the other party can only be done in an ex-parte hearing otherwise a judge's first duty in such a situation is to listen to both parties before they decide whether there is justification to issue an injunction to the process or not. Even in ex-parte hearing if an injunction is issued the other side will be given 21 days to appeal the ruling or injunction issued. It would appear to me that an ex-parte hearing was not required in this case. For your information the judge did not determine that there are triable issues. The judge does not need that to issue a certficate of urgency. All the judge needs is reasonable grounds that there is a case to be addreseed. The Judge will not address those issues. He will listen to both parties and if he determines that there are indeed triable issues the judge will issue an order taking the matter to full trial. That is how the law works my friend. Try following what happened in the Kiplagat case when he applied to have the Tribunal process suspended until a court determines what the terms of reference for the Tribunal should be. That might help you comprehend what is going on here. Judge Muchelule could not and did not issue an injunction stopping the process (already underway) until he had from both parties and decided that there was justifiable reasons to stop the process and wait for a full hearing. That is the same case here. Judge Lenaola could not issue an injunction based on applicants concerns without hearing from the other party. It is only after he hears from the all the parties that the judge can make a determination whether something wrong could be going on and issue an injunction to stop the process until the matter is heard in court. In this case if the judge establishes that something unlawful could have happened he will issue an order to take the matter to full hearing and Njiraini would be a siting duck waiting for the full hearing on the matter. There is nothing to be reversed. If the process in the end is determined to be faulty, the product Njiraini is toast. That wil happen at the full hearing. So before you mouth off about ignorance about the law try using your brain a little more if that is OK. In any event the fact that the interview was started on Monday and completed on Wednesday and appointment made on Thursday despite a court process asking the parties to show up in court on Friday already stinks and could be very prejudicial to Uhuru's move. If the court determines that the applicant in the case has establsihed that the process was phony, that court has every right to take the matter to full hearing and it wil be upto that court to make the final call. I think this nonsense of hiding under oh it is because a Kikuyu was appointed and that is why people are complaining si getting tiresome. I would suppose that it is possible to appoint even Kikuyus to state positions following due process instead of using panys routes all the time. We will question any attempts to subvert the laws and due process in Kenya whether it is a Kikuyu, a Tobiko or whoever. Bwana Adongo When it comes to discussing politics and tribalism, I am unlikely to beat you in that argument. For the simple reason that these are all abstract issues that need not be premised on any fact. But as you have previously been through, when it comes to matters of fact and in particular those involving the law, they simply way about your head. Recent debates with Mank, Tactician and I have exposed your continued ignorance of even matters written down. I do console myself that you have never taken evangelism for I think your congregation could actually be praising wine drinking and condemning water drinking. Now back to this saga. You are the one that frist claimed that Uhuru and company would be in contempt of court: Folks,Does this not amount to contempt of court? Are these people trying to cicurmvent the court proceedings so that when they appear in court tomorrow they can say the case has been overtaken by events? How about if the court rules in favour of the applicants and orders a new process? Do these people knwo that this kind of case can be filed even after an appointment has been made? Why would they want to provoke the judge in such an aggressive way? Is Uhuru really ready for another tussle with the courts just after being told he broke the law with the budget? Uhuru should be told he cannot bring muthamaki operations in the government? Kenya is not a monarchy run by a muthamaki. Lets wait and see what Judge Lenaola will say tomorrow. He is not a pushover kind of guy. I don't know why Uhuru and company want Njiraini to start with a cloud over his head. But then again that is the way some of these chaps work. We will see how this goes. At that point you were convinced that there was contempt of court and even saw doom for Uhuru. I pointed out to you that no orders had been given to the KRA board by way of injunction to stop the appointment hence the issue of contempt would not arise! But as is typical, you returned in true yumba yumba mode and now wanted to start off with "what the judge might rule". Kamale,It all depends on what Judge Lenaola rules tommorow. Hopefully muthamaki is not going to advice his boys not to show up in court. The issue is the application was to have the interviews not just stopped but re-done and the applicants gave a very clear reason for that saying the interviews were shrouded in darkness and secrecy contrary to constitutional requirements for recruitment of state officers. If indeed the judge rules that there is a case to be heard to determine if the interviews were done secretly and that could make them unacceptable then the judge will issue an injuction against the appointment and let the matter go to a full hearing. For starters, the judge did rule that the case be heard by asking for an inter parte hearing and asked COFEK to serve the KRA board with the orders for the hearing. The judge did not stop the process Here is the detail you miss: Mr Njiraini's appointment comes a day after Consumers Federation of Kenya (Cofek) went to court seeking orders to stop the KRA board and the Ministry of Finance from recruiting a new Commissioner-General arguing that he current hiring process “is shrouded in mystery.”
On Wednesday, High Court Judge Isaac Lenaola certified the case as urgent and directed the parties to appear in court on Friday for the hearing. www.nation.co.ke/business/news/Njiraini+named+new+KRA+boss/-/1006/1310362/-/33hwu8/-/index.htmlFor your information the judge did not determine that there are triable issues. The judge does not need that to issue a certficate of urgency. All the judge needs is reasonable grounds that there is a case to be addreseed. The Judge will not address those issues. He will listen to both parties and if he determines that there are indeed triable issues the judge will issue an order taking the matter to full trial. That is how the law works my friend Do you see the contradiction in your thinking? You first suggest that the judge did not determine that there were triable issues....and that the judge does not to issue a certificate of urgency? If the judge did not determine that there were tribal issues, he would have dismissed the plaint. But he actually did believe that there were triable issues and that on the basis that there might possible loss to the applicants, certified that the matter should be heard on an urgency basis to minimise that harm that would affect the applicant. When the judge issues orders for an inter parties hearing he ACTUALLY sent the matter to a FULL trial - this is not the multi-step ICC process you are used to. It is a a simple civil matter and this hearing will determine if the law was broken or not. For your information the judge did not determine that there are triable issues. The judge does not need that to issue a certficate of urgency. All the judge needs is reasonable grounds that there is a case to be addreseed. The Judge will not address those issues. He will listen to both parties and if he determines that there are indeed triable issues the judge will issue an order taking the matter to full trial. That is how the law works my friend For your information the judge did not determine that there are triable issues. The judge does not need that to issue a certficate of urgency. All the judge needs is reasonable grounds that there is a case to be addreseed. The Judge will not address those issues. He will listen to both parties and if he determines that there are indeed triable issues the judge will issue an order taking the matter to full trial. That is how the law works my friend Try following what happened in the Kiplagat case when he applied to have the Tribunal process suspended until a court determines what the terms of reference for the Tribunal should be. That might help you comprehend what is going on here. Judge Muchelule could not and did not issue an injunction stopping the process (already underway) until he had from both parties and decided that there was justifiable reasons to stop the process and wait for a full hearing. That is the same case here. You had the benefit of the Muchelule ruling right here in Jukwaa courtesy of Sadik and yet still did not either read it or understand it. Just what was the ruling that Muchelule gave? He stopped the Tribunal from proceeding until the matter has heard fully. You see, can only stop something that is moving, not one that has stopped or completed its journey. The appointment of Njiraine is complete after the intervies had been completed. COFEK wanted the interviews to be stopped but the appointment of Njiraine had been completed before any orders had been issued which means its application had been overtaken by events. That is why the Kiplagat case and this one is like oranges and bananas! The only recourse available to COFEK is to contest the appointment, but its original application to stop the interviews died ages ago. So before you mouth off about ignorance about the law try using your brain a little more if that is OK. In any event the fact that the interview was started on Monday and completed on Wednesday and appointment made on Thursday despite a court process asking the parties to show up in court on Friday already stinks and could be very prejudicial to Uhuru's move. If the court determines that the applicant in the case has establsihed that the process was phony, that court has every right to take the matter to full hearing and it wil be upto that court to make the final call. And this actually proves the bankruptcy of your argument. You seem to have issues that the board took three days to interview and by the fourth had appointed someone. Do you have an idea of how many people were being interviewed for the job? There were seven people to be interviewed for the job and I am not sure whether you wanted a day for each…..! You then miss the sequence of events regarding the interview process and the court application. The application was made on Wednesday. No specific orders were issued by the court stopping KRA from doing their work, and all they were asked to do was to appear in court on Friday and argue their side of the case. I would started addressing you on the tribe issue, but you being a closeted tribalist, it becomes a pointless exercise. Suffice to say that I still believe that is the beef you have. If it had been Adan or Awuor, I am certain you would have been shouting yourself hoarse on how the process is fair and COFEK a bunch of busy bodies. |
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Jan 20, 2012 9:12:18 GMT 3
...and this is the Njiraine who would not get a constitutional commission job for the simple reason he was a kikuyu notwithstanding the fact that he was the best candidate!!! Now he still turns out to be the best and for the same reason of being a kikuyu, he should not get the job???
Just what happened to his rights against discrimination?
|
|
|
|
Post by mangai on Jan 20, 2012 12:01:46 GMT 3
Just like the appointment of Njoroge as CCK's Director General was reversed by court, Njiraini's is also possible if Cofek convinces the court with its application. It therefore doesn't mean the issue is settled. The appointment can still be reversed. One other thing is that Michael Waweru is quoted to have 'preferred' an insider to succeed him. Chances of him influencing the selection criteria cannot be ruled out. Isn't Marsden Madoka too a vice chairman of Uhuru Kenyatta's Kanu?
|
|
|
|
Post by adongo23456 on Jan 20, 2012 12:13:34 GMT 3
Now Mr. Smart Lawyer,How do you expect the judge to issue and injunction without hearing from both parties? Ruling without the other party can only be done in an ex-parte hearing otherwise a judge's first duty in such a situation is to listen to both parties before they decide whether there is justification to issue an injunction to the process or not. Even in ex-parte hearing if an injunction is issued the other side will be given 21 days to appeal the ruling or injunction issued. It would appear to me that an ex-parte hearing was not required in this case. For your information the judge did not determine that there are triable issues. The judge does not need that to issue a certficate of urgency. All the judge needs is reasonable grounds that there is a case to be addreseed. The Judge will not address those issues. He will listen to both parties and if he determines that there are indeed triable issues the judge will issue an order taking the matter to full trial. That is how the law works my friend. Try following what happened in the Kiplagat case when he applied to have the Tribunal process suspended until a court determines what the terms of reference for the Tribunal should be. That might help you comprehend what is going on here. Judge Muchelule could not and did not issue an injunction stopping the process (already underway) until he had from both parties and decided that there was justifiable reasons to stop the process and wait for a full hearing. That is the same case here. Judge Lenaola could not issue an injunction based on applicants concerns without hearing from the other party. It is only after he hears from the all the parties that the judge can make a determination whether something wrong could be going on and issue an injunction to stop the process until the matter is heard in court. In this case if the judge establishes that something unlawful could have happened he will issue an order to take the matter to full hearing and Njiraini would be a siting duck waiting for the full hearing on the matter. There is nothing to be reversed. If the process in the end is determined to be faulty, the product Njiraini is toast. That wil happen at the full hearing. So before you mouth off about ignorance about the law try using your brain a little more if that is OK. In any event the fact that the interview was started on Monday and completed on Wednesday and appointment made on Thursday despite a court process asking the parties to show up in court on Friday already stinks and could be very prejudicial to Uhuru's move. If the court determines that the applicant in the case has establsihed that the process was phony, that court has every right to take the matter to full hearing and it wil be upto that court to make the final call. I think this nonsense of hiding under oh it is because a Kikuyu was appointed and that is why people are complaining si getting tiresome. I would suppose that it is possible to appoint even Kikuyus to state positions following due process instead of using panys routes all the time. We will question any attempts to subvert the laws and due process in Kenya whether it is a Kikuyu, a Tobiko or whoever. Bwana Adongo When it comes to discussing politics and tribalism, I am unlikely to beat you in that argument. For the simple reason that these are all abstract issues that need not be premised on any fact. But as you have previously been through, when it comes to matters of fact and in particular those involving the law, they simply way about your head. Recent debates with Mank, Tactician and I have exposed your continued ignorance of even matters written down. I do console myself that you have never taken evangelism for I think your congregation could actually be praising wine drinking and condemning water drinking. Now back to this saga. You are the one that frist claimed that Uhuru and company would be in contempt of court: At that point you were convinced that there was contempt of court and even saw doom for Uhuru. I pointed out to you that no orders had been given to the KRA board by way of injunction to stop the appointment hence the issue of contempt would not arise! But as is typical, you returned in true yumba yumba mode and now wanted to start off with "what the judge might rule". For starters, the judge did rule that the case be heard by asking for an inter parte hearing and asked COFEK to serve the KRA board with the orders for the hearing. The judge did not stop the process Here is the detail you miss: Mr Njiraini's appointment comes a day after Consumers Federation of Kenya (Cofek) went to court seeking orders to stop the KRA board and the Ministry of Finance from recruiting a new Commissioner-General arguing that he current hiring process “is shrouded in mystery.”
On Wednesday, High Court Judge Isaac Lenaola certified the case as urgent and directed the parties to appear in court on Friday for the hearing. www.nation.co.ke/business/news/Njiraini+named+new+KRA+boss/-/1006/1310362/-/33hwu8/-/index.htmlDo you see the contradiction in your thinking? You first suggest that the judge did not determine that there were triable issues....and that the judge does not to issue a certificate of urgency? If the judge did not determine that there were tribal issues, he would have dismissed the plaint. But he actually did believe that there were triable issues and that on the basis that there might possible loss to the applicants, certified that the matter should be heard on an urgency basis to minimise that harm that would affect the applicant. When the judge issues orders for an inter parties hearing he ACTUALLY sent the matter to a FULL trial - this is not the multi-step ICC process you are used to. It is a a simple civil matter and this hearing will determine if the law was broken or not. For your information the judge did not determine that there are triable issues. The judge does not need that to issue a certficate of urgency. All the judge needs is reasonable grounds that there is a case to be addreseed. The Judge will not address those issues. He will listen to both parties and if he determines that there are indeed triable issues the judge will issue an order taking the matter to full trial. That is how the law works my friend For your information the judge did not determine that there are triable issues. The judge does not need that to issue a certficate of urgency. All the judge needs is reasonable grounds that there is a case to be addreseed. The Judge will not address those issues. He will listen to both parties and if he determines that there are indeed triable issues the judge will issue an order taking the matter to full trial. That is how the law works my friend You had the benefit of the Muchelule ruling right here in Jukwaa courtesy of Sadik and yet still did not either read it or understand it. Just what was the ruling that Muchelule gave? He stopped the Tribunal from proceeding until the matter has heard fully. You see, can only stop something that is moving, not one that has stopped or completed its journey. The appointment of Njiraine is complete after the intervies had been completed. COFEK wanted the interviews to be stopped but the appointment of Njiraine had been completed before any orders had been issued which means its application had been overtaken by events. That is why the Kiplagat case and this one is like oranges and bananas! The only recourse available to COFEK is to contest the appointment, but its original application to stop the interviews died ages ago. So before you mouth off about ignorance about the law try using your brain a little more if that is OK. In any event the fact that the interview was started on Monday and completed on Wednesday and appointment made on Thursday despite a court process asking the parties to show up in court on Friday already stinks and could be very prejudicial to Uhuru's move. If the court determines that the applicant in the case has establsihed that the process was phony, that court has every right to take the matter to full hearing and it wil be upto that court to make the final call. And this actually proves the bankruptcy of your argument. You seem to have issues that the board took three days to interview and by the fourth had appointed someone. Do you have an idea of how many people were being interviewed for the job? There were seven people to be interviewed for the job and I am not sure whether you wanted a day for each…..! You then miss the sequence of events regarding the interview process and the court application. The application was made on Wednesday. No specific orders were issued by the court stopping KRA from doing their work, and all they were asked to do was to appear in court on Friday and argue their side of the case. I would started addressing you on the tribe issue, but you being a closeted tribalist, it becomes a pointless exercise. Suffice to say that I still believe that is the beef you have. If it had been Adan or Awuor, I am certain you would have been shouting yourself hoarse on how the process is fair and COFEK a bunch of busy bodies. Stop beating around the bush with nonsense and hiding under other people's skirts. You are a grown man for crying out loud. Let me start with your last tribalist crap which you have been exposed to dwell on here in jukwaa forever. In fact I dare say you remind me of that Nick fellow people were talking about with an outburst and hate speech towards a certain Kenyan columnist. People have actually raised issues with your tribalism, Mr. Kamale in that thread and you better take them seriously. You are obssessed with tribal innuendoes which is your known stock of trade. Now you suggest that if it was owuor or Aden Mohamed who was appointed then adongo would be very happy. Let me remind you of your yoyo dance during the battle for the position of the Chief Justice. Many tribalists, you included, here were fixated that the adongos wanted the Luo fellow there whose name I don't even remember to be appointed. Look up the thread if you want to see for yourself. Why was that? Because some of you only see things in terms of tribes and you have a record here to prove it. When we appluaded the appointment of Willy Mitunga who many of you villified with homophobic innuendos (not surprising) you folks went ballistic pleading with Raila and Kibaki to reject the appointment of Mutunga who frightened the status quo worshippers to the bone. So why was adongo pleased with the appointment of Dr. Mutunga afterall the last time I checked he was not a Luo? Simple. He is competent for the job. He is a fresh air from the sufffocating status quo "yes" men and women who take orders from State House and of course he has earned his place in our hearts because of his own history of commitment to the struggle for a better Kenya. In fact I told you on the Mutunga thread that many tribalists who thought we were rooting for the Luo dude would have preferred him a thousand times better instead of the scary Mutunga who does not fit their beaten path mentality. You can check that too. Now in this matter you are deperate to hide under a Kikuyu was appointed and so people are mad. That is the last refuge of tribalists and it is shameful, but you wouldn't know shame if it hit you in the face twice. We are concerned about a crooked and devious process where cronies are recycling fellow cronies. We are sick of nepotism and favouritism and yes we are tired tribalism in appointments in the ministry of finance. Isn't that what Hassan Omar pointed out that made some of you want to kill him? It is a fact and you can try hiding from it with very little success. You cannot muthamaki the whole country and expect people to keep quiet. Kenya belongs to all Kenyans whether you like it or not. In fact if you read the comments people have made including the Ernst Young angle it is obvious Kenyans are being hosed by a cabal of cronies with their bicks in the public pond sucking everything. Doesn't that concern you? Of course it doesn't. Shame in you for that. On the specifics you are inventing things to fit your convoluted argument. I don't know where adongo was convinced their was a contempt of court. I raised the question and you said the order had not been issued. Fair enough. Now to drag that up as proof positive that Mr. Kamale has some hidden legal knowledge to awe Jukwaa folks. Really? Then you corrupt my pointing out the Kiplagat case and Judge Muchelule's ruling to try to dodge the issue and display your so called legal genius. Again you miss the point by a mile. I raised the Kiplagat case to point out the difference between ex-parte hearings and inter-parte hearings. It had nothing to do with what Judge Muchelule determined. You can at least get that. Your oranges and banans are on you. I was trying to tell our Mr. legal assistant that Judge Lenaola did not make an ex-parte ruling and that is why he did not issue and injunction. Your claim before was that the judge declined to issue an injunction even though he heard the case. That is legal fiction. Judge Leneola asked for an inter-parte hearing and summoned all parties to appear before him on Friday so he could make a ruling on the matter. That and only that is the similarity between this case and the Kiplagat case. Nowhere did adongo suggest that Judge Lenaola should or will make a similar ruling like the case of Kiplagat. I expect legal gurus like you to comprehend such things but of course I am not disappointed. Somewhere in there you even had the nerve to lie rather shamefully that adongo said that judge Lenaola did not issue a certificate of urgency. That is rubbish because I said the exact opposite. Go back and read what I said. I specifically said the judge only issued a certificate of urgency after determining that there are reasonable grounds to hear the case and then ordered for a hearing of both parties. That is in black and white. If you want to quote me at least take your time to get what I am saying and don't invent nonsense which I did not say and then try to respond to the same. To cut through the chase. Any normal person including tribalists would agree that the process was unduly rushed. Any person would see that part of the rush was to beat the court case which all the parties knew had been commenced and order issued for a Friday court date. I expect even the most ardent tribalists to agree with that. There is sufficient evidence that the interviews were shrouded in secrecy. The claim tthat these are not constitutional appointements is a smokescreen for those who want to restore the old order where things are done in darkness and cronism, nepotism and naked tribalism rules the day. These are senior state officers and transparency is required in any such appointments. I am very sure if any such things were done in the PM's office the Kamales would be screaming from the rooftops. But since this is a muthamaki operation it is all good with kamale. That is the sickening hypocricy that is killing our country and perpetuating tribalism. Today we will hear what the judge has to say. I am sure some of you are banking on the process having been completed and is therefore unstoppable. Remember the "duly elected" circus sworn in at night. Just complete the robbery and everything is OK. Didn't quite work that way, did it? |
|
|
|
Post by phil on Jan 20, 2012 13:46:15 GMT 3
If we could know what edge Njiriani has over Adan of BBK that the Board and Uhuru saw then perhaps we could comment fairly.
Uhuru Kenyatta is the last person to rely on to implement regional balance.
Njiriani is an experienced taxman the rest of the candidates must be seen to have something extra to convince the appointing authority that they have provide more to KRA than Njiriani would.
But to me, so long as the two principals are in agreement, this looks like a closed chapter.
|
|
|
|
Post by stibin on Jan 20, 2012 14:11:07 GMT 3
I see a display of same impunity as when Henry Kosgei (former Industrialization Minister) appointed Joseph Kosgei to head KEBS. Most of us recall disgraceful exit of Joseph from the standards body and I forsee similar thing happening to Njiraini.
|
|
|
|
Post by mangai on Jan 20, 2012 14:21:12 GMT 3
But to me, so long as the two principals are in agreement, this looks like a closed chapter. The appointment is done by the Finance Minister. The two principals do not have any input. |
|
