|
Post by adongo23456 on Apr 28, 2012 17:44:52 GMT 3
www.the-star.co.ke/national/national/73309-mutunga-warns-2013-candidatesMUTUNGA WARNS 2013 CANDIDATES Friday, 27 April 2012 23:49 BY WESONGA OCHIENG CHIEF Justice Willy Mutunga has warned that Chapter Six of the new constitution will be strictly enforced in the next general elections. "That chapter (Six on leadership and integrity) talks about leadership across our society. The values are clear. Those husbands who are beating their wives must know that you can not even be a councillor or a chief. Forget it," said Mutunga yesterday in Mombasa during the launch of the Muslim for Human Rights Legal Aid Clinic."Those of you who are running for office, whatever office you are running for, should know that if you are found to have been violent, or you have stolen votes or you brutalized voters, Chapter Six will enure that you will never run for political office again. Those running for office should read that chapter very carefully because if you are guilty it is the chapter that will make sure that you don't run for any public office in this country," he said. Mutunga, known for his independence and reform record, asked politicians to keenly read Chapter Six of the constitution which he said will be adhered to in totality. The status of Deputy Prime Minister Uhuru Kenyatta and Eldoret North MP William Ruto under the Leadership Code is particularly significant as they are facing charges of crimes against humanity in the Hague. Former Justice minister Mutula Kilonzo repeatedly said that Uhuru and Ruto would not be eligible under the new constitution for any elective post unless the ICC clears them. The Leadership and Integrity Bill is under preparation to operationalise Chapter Six of the constitution. "Persons facing serious crimes charges both locally and abroad are not allowed to stand for election or appointment to any state office," Justice PS Gichira Kibara said in a speech read for him at a legislative seminar earlier this month. Both Uhuru and Ruto have publicly declared their intention to succeed President Kibaki despite the ICC charges against them being confirmed in January this year. However they will be handicapped by Chapter Six that deals with leadership and integrity; Chapter Eight on the legislature; and Chapter Nine on the executive. Chapter Eight article 99 (2) (g) says that a person is disqualified from being elected as an MP if the person has been sentenced to imprisonment of at least six months. But MPs reviewing the draft constitutions in Naivasha in January 2010 softened this clause by introducing another clause stating, "a person is not disqualified under clause (2) unless all possibility of appeal or review of the relevant sentence and decision has been exhausted."Uhuru and Ruto argue that they have not yet been convicted by the ICC, let alone having exhausted the appeal process. Article 99 (2) (h) says that a candidate cannot stand if he “is found, in accordance with any law, to have misused or abused a State office or public office or in any way to have contravened Chapter Six which deals with integrity." Chapter Nine article 137 (1) (b) stipulates that a person can only stand for President if he or she passes the bar of vying as an MP. So to stand for president, a Kenya must meet the rules under Clause 99 and Chapter Six on leadership and integrity. Mutunga's comments yesterday again raised the issue of whether facing criminal charges would constitute a sufficient question mark on your integrity under Chapter Six to bar you from standing for office. Yesterday the CJ insisted that it was important for Kenyans to elect leaders with high moral integrity because they will hold office in trust. He asked Kenyans to remain calm as the country prepares for next elections due on March 4, 2012 and to shy away from politicians propagating violence and tribalism. He said the poor need to be shielded by the law. The Mombasa clinic will help the public in processing bail and bonds, tracing files at the law courts, and educating local communities in the administration of justice. “The poor need justice and not the law. This facility comes at a time when reforms are rife in the judiciary and I think it will help us in the whole process now that we have elections ahead,” said Mutunga. Muhuri in collaboration with law students at the Mombasa campus of University of Nairobi will offer paralegal services at the facility. The Rome Statute, under which the ICC operates, is legally part of Kenya’s constitution. According to the Rome Statute, a person charged before the court is subject to imprisonment of up to 30 years. According to Chapter One of the constitution, the general rules of international law form part of the law of Kenya, as do any treaty or convention ratified by Kenya. "The ICC is not a foreign court as it is being portrayed. The Kenyan constitution recognises that international law is a source of the Kenyan law. The ICC gave Kenya options but because of parliament's wisdom or lack of it, they failed," said Mutunga's chief of Staff Duncan Okello on Thursday. "The cases at the court are right but in a manner that is politically inconveniencing to some," Okello told student leaders at Bomas.
|
|
|
Post by jakaswanga on Apr 29, 2012 10:21:30 GMT 3
PS Gachira Kibari is preparing a bill whose entirety would bar Uhuruto. But before it becomes operational as law, both cabinet and parliament, and the AG advising the president will have their input in it. And just like in Naivasha Jan 2010, that can only mean dilution. A window for Uhuruto. I think it will have to be public outcry and grassroots anger, that would put the pressure for a more robust integrity bill.
A lot of known syndicated criminals are in parliament --drug runners and treasury looters, but they do not have convictions because they have always bought off the judiciary. So if having a conviction is the bar (I really do not see the MPigs opting for being a suspect as enough to bar one) it will be business as usual. Saitoti's involvement in scams like Goldenberg are legally mere rumours and character assassination.
And here is Dr. Studds Mutunga more interested in warning my cousin who steals fish from nets that he can not be a councillor, instead of facing the elephant in the room. May be he is being tactical and the rest, but the message is clear: Even the CJ can not frontally face Uhuruto and rub the truth in their eyes. He has to do it by proxy, giving himself an escape route should the need be.
And old Kibaki can always refuse to sign the integrity clause into law, should UK find it too strong, and create a new round of constitutional crisis with elections at the door. The show down must come.
|
|
|
Post by nalinali on Apr 29, 2012 12:44:19 GMT 3
PS Gachira Kibari is preparing a bill whose entirety would bar Uhuruto. But before it becomes operational as law, both cabinet and parliament, and the AG advising the president will have their input in it. And just like in Naivasha Jan 2010, that can only mean dilution. A window for Uhuruto. I think it will have to be public outcry and grassroots anger, that would put the pressure for a more robust integrity bill. A lot of known syndicated criminals are in parliament --drug runners and treasury looters, but they do not have convictions because they have always bought off the judiciary. So if having a conviction is the bar (I really do not see the MPigs opting for being a suspect as enough to bar one) it will be business as usual. Saitoti's involvement in scams like Goldenberg are legally mere rumours and character assassination. And here is Dr. Studds Mutunga more interested in warning my cousin who steals fish from nets that he can not be a councillor, instead of facing the elephant in the room. May be he is being tactical and the rest, but the message is clear: Even the CJ can not frontally face Uhuruto and rub the truth in their eyes. He has to do it by proxy, giving himself an escape route should the need be. And old Kibaki can always refuse to sign the integrity clause into law, should UK find it too strong, and create a new round of constitutional crisis with elections at the door. The show down must come. Jakaswanga You are spot on. Rhetoric, on intent on the one hand, and actualization of intent on the other hand, have never drunk from the same fountain. While the proposals on integrity offer the most reassuring scenario for Kenyans interested in a morally sound leadership, the systemic buraucracy, still infested with retrogressive forces, will clearly ensure that such proposals come to naught.
|
|
|
Post by merlin on Apr 29, 2012 16:42:54 GMT 3
PS Gachira Kibari is preparing a bill whose entirety would bar Uhuruto. But before it becomes operational as law, both cabinet and parliament, and the AG advising the president will have their input in it. And just like in Naivasha Jan 2010, that can only mean dilution. A window for Uhuruto. I think it will have to be public outcry and grassroots anger, that would put the pressure for a more robust integrity bill. A lot of known syndicated criminals are in parliament --drug runners and treasury looters, but they do not have convictions because they have always bought off the judiciary. So if having a conviction is the bar (I really do not see the MPigs opting for being a suspect as enough to bar one) it will be business as usual. Saitoti's involvement in scams like Goldenberg are legally mere rumours and character assassination. And here is Dr. Studds Mutunga more interested in warning my cousin who steals fish from nets that he can not be a councillor, instead of facing the elephant in the room. May be he is being tactical and the rest, but the message is clear: Even the CJ can not frontally face Uhuruto and rub the truth in their eyes. He has to do it by proxy, giving himself an escape route should the need be. And old Kibaki can always refuse to sign the integrity clause into law, should UK find it too strong, and create a new round of constitutional crisis with elections at the door. The show down must come. Jakaswanga You are spot on. Rhetoric, on intent on the one hand, and actualization of intent on the other hand, have never drunk from the same fountain. While the proposals on integrity offer the most reassuring scenario for Kenyans interested in a morally sound leadership, the systemic buraucracy, still infested with retrogressive forces, will clearly ensure that such proposals come to naught. Fishermen's LatinYou tell me Mutunga is not interested in Impartial Law? I think some of the politicians are scared out of their wits losing their privileges in dealing with the law. They can water down the intensity of the law though not the intent. Keeping with your cousin; eventually the net will tighten around these masters of impunity like what is happening with Kibaki and friends. They are scared by the impartiality of the ICC and do everything to rip the net that is cast around them. However to no avail; the net is gripping them tighter and tighter till justice will be done. Tighten the net is not an activity excluded to Mutunga, all the good willing citizens of our Nation together with good willing international support are the ones who are pulling the net tighter so nalinali it is also up to you to give it a good pull or are you looking for a opportunity to rip the net?
|
|
|
Post by adongo23456 on Apr 29, 2012 17:31:16 GMT 3
Folks,
First of all we cannot just sit around and expect stuff to fall on our laps. The constitution is clear about integrity as a requirement to seek and retain public office. M.Ps can fool around with the operational aspects of Chapter Six but they cannot change it. If they pass bills and laws that are inconsistent with the spirit and letter of the constitution, Kenyans are free to take the matter to court and chances are they can compel parliament to ensure that the constitution is adhered to.
The era of mta do is over. We need to wake up to that reality. We have a very pro-active katiba which empowers all citizens and groups working in their interests to challenge illegalities emanating from any part of our governance. Kenyans have so far used that chance to stop things that before were impossible before like when Kibaki tried to impose his CJ on us.
I know Dr. Mutunga warned wife beaters out there to watch out or lose on that Chief's job they are thinking about. I can understand why some wife beaters may be concerned but the significance of the whole message to me was that the Integrity Chapter of the constitution will be adhered to should such matters end up in court where they will most likely move all the way up to the Supreme Court.
Personally I am not interested in Dr. Mutunga's earrings which seems to concern some people. I am more interested in the fact that as the CJ he is making clear to the country that the judiciary and Supreme Court will uphold the ideals of the Integrity requirements. That should be a clear warning to the mischief makers who think they can turn corners and live by their own laws of the jungle. There is only one constitution in the republic and we all may have to live by it after all.
I think there is reasonable debate whether accusations alone can constitute violations of integrity before one is convicted. The butchers of Naivasha did add the requirement of exhausting all appeals. But seriously if you are facing charges of mass murder and rape of Kenyans or god forbid if you are already convicted of the same, it is going to be near impossible to tell Kenyans you have to exhaust your appeals. You are toast. We will take you court if you think you are not.
It is like that serial killer in Kisii who hit the news sometimes back. Technically the serial killer can say he can be the president of Kenya as he awaits the results of his appeals but anybody who thinks such a scumbag can be our president is living in denial. I do not see much difference between the problems the Kisii serial killer faces and the problems Uhuru and Ruto face. Those guys need to start thinking of different careers after they toboa their jail term.
|
|
|
Post by Daktari wa makazi on Apr 29, 2012 18:52:24 GMT 3
Dr Mutunga is talking nonsense.
First, it is not for him to implement the law, his role, as the judiciary is to enforce it. He cannot therefore make prejudicial comments on implementation, specifically on legislation, which yet to be enacted, while at the same time duty bound to enforce it. It is only when the matter comes to the Courts, is it open for him as the judiciary to adjudicate on it.
Second, if his comments are to be taking to mean an interpretation of the Constitution, then that is not only premature but basically toothless and uncalled. Our legal system is that there must be two sides to ventilate on matters - an adversarial. The judiciary can only therefore proffer its judgement after hearing opposing sides in the matter. Payakuring in public is not for the judges but for politicians.
Third, of what business has he got addressing public kamkunji when the courts he is suppose to lead are overwhelmed with cases? He needs to spend his time clearing the serious backlog developing at the Supreme Court.
Fourth, now that he has made his opinion public, one wonders how would adjudicate in case dealing with that same matter he opined in public? Will he not be seen to be prejudicial to the party against whom his views disfavour?
Fifth, a CJ, he is the final word on the issue he makes pronouncement on, there is no redress and his comments may mean an aggrieved party cannot seek second opinion as it were! How does that serve the interest of justice which he swore to uphold?
If he wants to engage in legal discourse, maybe he, who is from the Coast, could tell us what is the legal status of Mombasa Republican Council?.
|
|
|
Post by adongo23456 on Apr 29, 2012 21:53:12 GMT 3
Dr Mutunga is talking nonsense. First, it is not for him to implement the law, his role, as the judiciary is to enforce it. He cannot therefore make prejudicial comments on implementation, specifically on legislation, which yet to be enacted, while at the same time duty bound to enforce it. It is only when the matter comes to the Courts, is it open for him as the judiciary to adjudicate on it. Second, if his comments are to be taking to mean an interpretation of the Constitution, then that is not only premature but basically toothless and uncalled. Our legal system is that there must be two sides to ventilate on matters - an adversarial. The judiciary can only therefore proffer its judgement after hearing opposing sides in the matter. Payakuring in public is not for the judges but for politicians. Third, of what business has he got addressing public kamkunji when the courts he is suppose to lead are overwhelmed with cases? He needs to spend his time clearing the serious backlog developing at the Supreme Court. Fourth, now that he has made his opinion public, one wonders how would adjudicate in case dealing with that same matter he opined in public? Will he not be seen to be prejudicial to the party against whom his views disfavour? Fifth, a CJ, he is the final word on the issue he makes pronouncement on, there is no redress and his comments may mean an aggrieved party cannot seek second opinion as it were! How does that serve the interest of justice which he swore to uphold? If he wants to engage in legal discourse, maybe he, who is from the Coast, could tell us what is the legal status of Mombasa Republican Council?. Sadik,Sorry but you are the one talking nonsense. Big nonsense. Your statement below is as idiotic as it gets. "First, it is not for him to implement the law, his role, as the judiciary is to enforce it"Let me remind you that the new constitution is already in place. It was passed by a majority of Kenyans in a referendum on August 10, 2010. Dr. Mutunga as the CJ can only speak on the basis of that katiba and it has a chapter six which deals with integrity as a requirement for contesting and retaining public office. For your information, "implementing" the law and "enforcing" the law are pretty much the same thing. The new constitution is the supreme law of the land, period. Dr. Mutunga is simply saying that if and when issues of integrity in leadership come to the judiciary, including the Supreme Court, where Dr. Mutunga is the chair, the integrity requirements will be addressed according to the constitutional provisions. What is wrong with that? The rest of stuff you talk about like the MRC etc are just too ridiculous to bother with. But rest assured of one thing. Chapter Six of the constitution of the Republic of Kenya will be enforced. That is what the CJ told the nation. Good for him and good for the country. Why should this bother anybody unless they are crooks gunning for power?
|
|
|
Post by OtishOtish on Apr 29, 2012 22:23:28 GMT 3
Adongo: What you are witnessing is one of the ill effects of modern technology. From brain to keyboard to mass dissemination is a matter of seconds. Consequently, the world is constantly inundated with the products of random neural activity. I call for a return to fountain pen and paper.
|
|
|
Post by Daktari wa makazi on Apr 29, 2012 22:37:16 GMT 3
The problem with my jaluo friends is they are keen to throw stones even where they have no target to hit.
What I meant with implementation of legal provision is putting in place provision to realise the effect to that provision. Enforcement is usually used to address breach. That is the police 'enforce' the law, but ministries 'implement' it.
An example will help you understand.
It is a human right recognised by the Constitution to have education or health care, implementing that right means schools or hospitals are provided. But to enforce that provision, means action is taken against truancy or theft of hospital supplies.
|
|
bob
Full Member
Posts: 238
|
Post by bob on Apr 29, 2012 23:26:31 GMT 3
What the hell is wrong with you? Why are you so obsessed with jaluo this ,jaluo that,please style up......Mr Sadik!
|
|
|
Post by OtishOtish on Apr 29, 2012 23:42:53 GMT 3
The problem with my jaluo friends is they are keen to throw stones even where they have no target to hit. Sadik: You must be hoping that if you make things "tribal" then people, presumably keen to avoid being tagged in such a manner, won't call you on your nonsense. That sort of PC-truncheon won't work with some of us; so you better have a Plan B. By there way, don't assume that there is always a direct connection between people's handles, or what they write, and their tribe.
|
|
mbuta
Full Member
Posts: 182
|
Post by mbuta on Apr 29, 2012 23:54:30 GMT 3
OO, just wanna run this quickly by you? Has Sadik broken any standing orders on this forum by that Jaluo quip? And if not, I think avoiding your machete is not the standard you were shooting for, right?
|
|
|
Post by mwalimumkuu on Apr 30, 2012 5:23:12 GMT 3
The studs-man has miss stepped again. There are things that a judge can say in a public baraza and those that s/he can only say while on the bench.
The problem with these neophytes is that each one of them is scrambling for space even where none can be found.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 30, 2012 7:31:26 GMT 3
The studs-man has miss stepped again. There are things that a judge can say in a public baraza and those that s/he can only say while on the bench. The problem with these neophytes is that each one of them is scrambling for space even where none can be found. mwalimumkuuThat's just straight up lying. Mutunga is not looking for attention from anyone? He's being going about his job mostly quietly. And that's the truth!
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Apr 30, 2012 12:09:02 GMT 3
Mmmmmm...quietly and yet he opens his mouth in public about matters that may come to him as a judge?
The most embarrassing thing for this studded CJ is when he is requested to recuse himself from a case just because he went about yapping about his personal views!
For one with a divorce case hanging over his head and one of the charges is battery on his ex-missus, I just wonder how he can be talking wife beaters.....!
|
|
|
Post by merlin on Apr 30, 2012 12:54:08 GMT 3
Mmmmmm...quietly and yet he opens his mouth in public about matters that may come to him as a judge? The most embarrassing thing for this studded CJ is when he is requested to recuse himself from a case just because he went about yapping about his personal views! For one with a divorce case hanging over his head and one of the charges is battery on his ex-missus, I just wonder how he can be talking wife beaters.....! Kamalet,I do not have much regards for your comments on political issues though you are sinking deep with above comment stabbing low into the private life of someone. We cannot and should not discuss the pro or cons of Mutunga’s divorce case. We just don’t know. You just wait till he is convicted of wife beating.
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Apr 30, 2012 13:38:03 GMT 3
Mmmmmm...quietly and yet he opens his mouth in public about matters that may come to him as a judge? The most embarrassing thing for this studded CJ is when he is requested to recuse himself from a case just because he went about yapping about his personal views! For one with a divorce case hanging over his head and one of the charges is battery on his ex-missus, I just wonder how he can be talking wife beaters.....! Kamalet,I do not have much regards for your comments on political issues though you are sinking deep with above comment stabbing low into the private life of someone. We cannot and should not discuss the pro or cons of Mutunga’s divorce case. We just don’t know. You just wait till he is convicted of wife beating. Merlin They were not my words...but Mutunga's...here you go: Those husbands who are beating their wives must know that you can not even be a councillor or a chief. Forget it," said Mutunga yesterday in Mombasa during the launch of the Muslim for Human Rights Legal Aid Clinic.What does this say of a man facing similar accusations from his ex-missus in support of a divorce case?
|
|
|
Post by nalinali on Apr 30, 2012 13:39:45 GMT 3
Jakaswanga You are spot on. Rhetoric, on intent on the one hand, and actualization of intent on the other hand, have never drunk from the same fountain. While the proposals on integrity offer the most reassuring scenario for Kenyans interested in a morally sound leadership, the systemic buraucracy, still infested with retrogressive forces, will clearly ensure that such proposals come to naught. Fishermen's Latin Merlin What do you mean by "Fishermen's Latin"?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 30, 2012 15:50:18 GMT 3
Mmmmmm...quietly and yet he opens his mouth in public about matters that may come to him as a judge? The most embarrassing thing for this studded CJ is when he is requested to recuse himself from a case just because he went about yapping about his personal views! For one with a divorce case hanging over his head and one of the charges is battery on his ex-missus, I just wonder how he can be talking wife beaters.....! kamaletI'm sure you are in a position to tell Mutunga what and what he can't say in public. Let's wait and see if he will ever makes such obvious blunders. I can confidently say that you'll be waiting a long long time. Prove to us that Mutunga ever assulted his ex partner. Liar liar pants on fire! And so what if he's getting a divorce?
|
|
|
Post by merlin on Apr 30, 2012 16:22:14 GMT 3
Merlin What do you mean by "Fishermen's Latin"? Fishermen’s Latin; bragging that you caught the biggest fish but has nothing to show as prove. Spot on you wrote on the comment of Jakaswanga which purported Mutunga is not interested in a sturdy bill because he is scared of Uhuru. This is just bragging that Uhuru can do what he likes.
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Apr 30, 2012 16:29:13 GMT 3
Mmmmmm...quietly and yet he opens his mouth in public about matters that may come to him as a judge? The most embarrassing thing for this studded CJ is when he is requested to recuse himself from a case just because he went about yapping about his personal views! For one with a divorce case hanging over his head and one of the charges is battery on his ex-missus, I just wonder how he can be talking wife beaters.....! kamaletI'm sure you are in a position to tell Mutunga what and what he can't say in public. Let's wait and see if he will ever makes such obvious blunders. I can confidently say that you'll be waiting a long long time. Proof to us that Mutunga ever assulted his ex partner. Liar liar pants on fire! And so what if he's getting a divorce? ....and what would you know about divorces to have an opinion? In any case what is wrong with an activist battering his wife in your opinion?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 30, 2012 19:25:25 GMT 3
kamaletI'm sure you are in a position to tell Mutunga what and what he can't say in public. Let's wait and see if he will ever makes such obvious blunders. I can confidently say that you'll be waiting a long long time. Proof to us that Mutunga ever assulted his ex partner. Liar liar pants on fire! And so what if he's getting a divorce? ....and what would you know about divorces to have an opinion? In any case what is wrong with an activist battering his wife in your opinion? kamaletYour arsenal consists of lies and misogyny. You still haven't given the prove to support you claim.
|
|
|
Post by mwalimumkuu on Apr 30, 2012 19:35:20 GMT 3
....and what would you know about divorces to have an opinion? In any case what is wrong with an activist battering his wife in your opinion? kamaletYour arsenal consists of lies and misogyny. You still haven't given the prove to support you claim. Since you insist, here are excerpts from the petition: In her cross petition, Lax accused Mutunga of having a "violent and uncaring attitude" towards her and said he "concealed the existence of his relationship with women whom he had sired children with".The petition claims that Mutunga concealed from her the financial assistance he was giving to his children and that he "kept an open relationship with his former wife". In 2008, Mutunga gave some Tanzanian stools to a friend but Prof Lax claims she discovered they were given to a former girlfriend. Lax's petition also claims that in 2008 "he had a business trip while he had all along planned to visit two of his girlfriends in Canada." Lax also says Mutunga "denied the Respondent her conjugal rights" and did not visit her in New York when she was in hospital having treatment for hepatitis. Lax complained that Mutunga informed her of his decision to divorce her by email while her mother was battling with cancer.[/b]
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 30, 2012 20:16:22 GMT 3
kamaletYour arsenal consists of lies and misogyny. You still haven't given the prove to support you claim. Since you insist, here are excerpts from the petition: In her cross petition, Lax accused Mutunga of having a "violent and uncaring attitude" towards her and said he "concealed the existence of his relationship with women whom he had sired children with".The petition claims that Mutunga concealed from her the financial assistance he was giving to his children and that he "kept an open relationship with his former wife". In 2008, Mutunga gave some Tanzanian stools to a friend but Prof Lax claims she discovered they were given to a former girlfriend. Lax's petition also claims that in 2008 "he had a business trip while he had all along planned to visit two of his girlfriends in Canada." Lax also says Mutunga "denied the Respondent her conjugal rights" and did not visit her in New York when she was in hospital having treatment for hepatitis. Lax complained that Mutunga informed her of his decision to divorce her by email while her mother was battling with cancer. [/b] [/quote] mwalimumkuuExactly! kamalet's assistant (well one of them anyways) That's a PETITION. ALLEGATIONS if I must spell it out to you. Haven't you heard that I support the right of all accused even WAR CRIMINALS to due process. Still asking for proof from you and kamalet that Mutunga was violent with his ex partner. ANDgood thing that Mutunga didn't abdicate his responsibilities to his children and the women who bore and raise them! That's good for our country. If we had more men like that we wouldn't have children taking their nasty dying fathers to court for all the years of neglect and for inheritance as in the Njega Karume case of his son Thuo.
|
|
|
Post by mwalimumkuu on May 1, 2012 16:20:41 GMT 3
Since you insist, here are excerpts from the petition: In her cross petition, Lax accused Mutunga of having a "violent and uncaring attitude" towards her and said he "concealed the existence of his relationship with women whom he had sired children with".The petition claims that Mutunga concealed from her the financial assistance he was giving to his children and that he "kept an open relationship with his former wife". In 2008, Mutunga gave some Tanzanian stools to a friend but Prof Lax claims she discovered they were given to a former girlfriend. Lax's petition also claims that in 2008 "he had a business trip while he had all along planned to visit two of his girlfriends in Canada." Lax also says Mutunga "denied the Respondent her conjugal rights" and did not visit her in New York when she was in hospital having treatment for hepatitis. Lax complained that Mutunga informed her of his decision to divorce her by email while her mother was battling with cancer. [/b] [/quote] mwalimumkuuExactly! kamalet's assistant (well one of them anyways) That's a PETITION. ALLEGATIONS if I must spell it out to you. Haven't you heard that I support the right of all accused even WAR CRIMINALS to due process. Still asking for proof from you and kamalet that Mutunga was violent with his ex partner. ANDgood thing that Mutunga didn't abdicate his responsibilities to his children and the women who bore and raise them! That's good for our country. If we had more men like that we wouldn't have children taking their nasty dying fathers to court for all the years of neglect and for inheritance as in the Njega Karume case of his son Thuo. [/quote] Dial Prof. Lax or attend the court sessions for a verbatim recording of the evidence. Between; what proof do you have that Thuo is late Njenga's son?
|
|