[quote=B.Timer]Considering that it will not be a walk in the park amending the constitution if the proposed document passes the plebiscite test isnt it better to advocate doing so pre-referendum - however unpopular that position sounds.

In the interim ingest this:

Date 16th June 2010.
INTEROGATING THE PROPOSED CONSTITUTION.
The constitution being the supreme law of the land needs to be interrogated thoroughly and with sobriety, before we pass and subject ourselves to it.
Its Referendum process ought to be devoid of the usual passions, euphoria and blind following of the political elite. Unfortunately we seem to be falling into the same trap once again!
While appreciating that the proposed constitution is largely good for Kenya, I am uncomfortable with the areas as highlighted here after.

1)Kadhis Courts
Quite clearly, the principle of separation of state and religion is offended.
Inequality and/or lack of fairness in the way religious groups are addressed by the constitution - promoting the perception that one religion is favoured - as its practice is adopted by the state and funded by Govt.
It is discriminatory to all those who don’t profess Islam faith.
This in itself has the potential to cause friction among religious groups and possible nasty confrontations.
I see this as a kind of instilling fear to kenyans because Kadhis courts have been in existence since independence ...did kenyans fight each other in 2007 /8 because of Kadhis court....These are also specialised subordinate courts and anyone who is not satisfied in their rulings can go to the mainstream courts .....they are there to assist the mainstream courts ....both parties must agree to go to the Kadhis court...If you are not a muslim why should you deny your children the good governance, grass roots development entailed in the draft because of Kadhis court which will not affect your way of life? besides there is some history on the Kadhis courts
I got this from someone
I hope you know the book of Joshua Chapter 9, and what Joshua did
with the Gebion, when the Israelites broke the covenant and went to war they
were defeated, read the book of Joshua and know why and what was God's
answer. Our God respect covenants made by his people our fathers entered in
an agreement with the sultan and this can only be removed through dialogue
and not by forcing it be removed. Christians being one of them, should
attract others by our Christlike actions but not feeling we have the numbers
but don't do the will of God. The ....



2)Land.
Minimum and maximum parcels permissible!
This can only serve to upset the hither to prevailing equilibrium.
Declaring minimum and maximum acreage is introducing uncertainty in a hitherto stable situation. While I view the idea of putting an upper ceiling on land that one can hold as socialist, my main beef is with the low end capping.(the parliament Minimum land parcels allowed by law will mean many people cannot legally own land. What will happen to people whose pieces fall below the minimum then? Think
of Kenyans in places like Kiambu, Kisii etc.

This mininum acrage will be done by the representatives of the people(MPs)with input from the people.....its up to the people to give input to their Mps on what the minimum acreage would be in their region..... ......and then it will be possible to set different minimum acreages for different areas.....This constitution is not aimed at causing chaos but ensuring land is optimumly used....should the minimum can become difficult determine it could be set at Zero.....as for the maximum that is easy to handle because most of huge tracts of lands owned by individuals are Idle.....the aim it to ensure that these land is put into economic activity. creat jobs and food security..It was impractical to set exact minimum and maximum acreage because land use is quite dynamic and its easier to change an act of parliament to deal with such dynamism that change the constitution (it has taken us over 20years)...


will respond to the others pole pole as we head to 4 Aug ....

@Funda, a lawyer told me they're ratified by guys from the AG's office:the state counsel

@Fundaah, does the proposed constitution mention where/when/what conditions have to be met for the trieties to be ratified? That'd be great! I wonder how the Americans handle international trieties in their constitution (Kyoto Protocol??).

Funny guy...

Theconstitution provides a frame...the citizens through their representatives adds the meat....its up to the parliament to set those conditions.....Remember even setting the conditions could have brought up other contentious issues just as the setting of detailed conditions on abortion has done.....in setting the conditions
......the spirit of the constitution will rule....

Supremacy of this Constitution

2.
(4) Any law, including customary law, that is inconsistent with this
Constitution is void to the extent of the inconsistency, and any act or
omission in contravention of this Constitution is invalid.

Surely where is TRS....why have you left all this explanations to me make.....ama kwako hakuna free lunches .....Fatigue ...fatigue.....on me

My fear is we'll have international treaties being part of our constitution.Which section specifies that any ratification will go through bunge?