The much anticipated BBI judgment is being delivered by a seven-judge bench of the Court of Appeal.
Court president Justice Daniel Musinga is leading his colleagues Patrick Kiage, Hannah Okwengu, Fatuma Sichale, Francis Tuyoit, Roselyne Nambuye and Gatembu Kairu in delivering the judgment.
Legal experts say that only two outcomes are expected, which are to either uphold the High Court judgment that nullified BBI or overturn it and give life to the Constitution amendment process.
ODM leader Raila Odinga said they are not planning to move to the Supreme Court if the appeal is defeated.
In this case, the proponents and opponents of BBI put up a spirited fight early last month in a bid to convince the seven judges to rule in their favour.
The AG through Solicitor General Kennedy Ogeto laid out nine thematic areas that the Attorney General used to urge the judges to overturn the High Court judgment that nullified BBI.
Ogeto appealed to the court to right the wrong that was done by the five-judge bench at the High Court.
Ogeto argued that there was never an intention to make certain parts of the Constitution unamendable as the High Court had ruled.
Ogeto also faulted the five judges who unanimously rejected BBI for using Wikipedia as an authority in their judgment especially on the issue of popular initiative
The BBI secretariat and Odinga through lawyers James Orengo and Otiende Amollo said the promoters of BBI were Dennis Waweru and Junet Mohammed, dismissing arguments that it was President Uhuru Kenyatta.
Otiende said the promoters were Junet and Waweru but because anyone is allowed to support the initiative the President supported it.
He also argued that the one thing the High Court did not do in their 300-page judgment was to ask who the promoters were, saying in their case it was Waweru and Junet.
The President through lawyer Waweru Gatonye said the five-judge bench erred in law and fact by failing to adopt a holistic and contextual interpretation of constitutional provisions.
Gatonye said the provisions concerned the powers and exercise of presidential authority to meet constitutional aspirations and values.
The President also challenged the findings by the judges that the President of the Republic of Kenya can be sued in a civil court.
He argued that the judgment should be suspended because the judges failed to appreciate the scope and extent of the constitutional doctrine of presidential immunity granted by Article 143.
The anti-BBI team said President Kenyatta cannot initiate a popular initiative to change the Constitution while still in power.
