Lawyer Charles Kanjama takes BBI Appeal to the Supreme Court

Nairobi City lawyer Charles Kanjama to appeal the Court of Appeal Judgement  on grounds that the appellate court did not grant orders that the President returns the public funds used for the promotion of the constitutional unconstitutional amendment process according to Article 226 of the Constitution of Kenya,2010. 

The number of appeals to the Supreme Court rises to four which includes the IEBC, the Attorney General, Hon.Kihara Kariuki and Advocate Morara Omoke.

Advocate Kanjama in his memorandum of appeal seeks to appeal on five findings of the Court of Appeal whereas he seeks affirmation of nine other findings of the court.

In the judgement rendered by the Court  of Appeal ,it affirmed the decision of the High Court dismissing refund of public funds.

He further states that the Appellate court erred when it found that the basic structure of the Constitution of Kenya,2010 can only be altered by a primary constituent power. This includes civic education, public participation, National assembly debate and thereafter a referendum.

Mr Kanjama   seeks to have the Supreme Court affirm that the basic structure doctrine is applicable in Kenya.

He is also challenging that the president can be sued in civil proceedings during his tenure in office in respect to anything done in contrary to the Constitution.

Lawyer Charles Kanjama appeals that there can be no such thing as an amendment of the Constitution through a referendum when evidently there is a continuous voter registration at IEBC in preparation of the 2022 General elections.
 
Being aggrieved by the High Court judgement, Advocate Kanjama seeks to have two declarations set aside.

The 1st declaration identified that Article 257(10) requires all amendments be submitted as distinct referendum questions.

The 2nd declaration being that the BBI Steering Committee established by his Excellency President Uhuru Muigai Kenya is an unconstitutional and unlawful entity. 
 

Lawyer Kanjama further seeks the Supreme Court to affirm nine findings made by the Court of Appeal. These findings include that:

The President does not have the capacity or authority to initiate Constitutional amendments.
Constitutional amendments can only be initiate by Parliament through parliamentary initiative under Article 256 of the Constitutional or Popular initiative under Article 257.

 The BBI Steering Committee has no legal capacity whatsoever to initiate Constitutional changes.

The Constitutional Amendment Bill, 2020 is unconstitutional and an usurpation of the peoples exercise of sovereign power under article 1 of the Constitution. 

IEBC lacks the requisite forum to carry out the referendum which included verification of all signatures in support of the amendment bill.

This yet another legal battle ready to unveil itself. BBI Constitutional battles continues.