• Secretary Mwangi argues that BBI’s work concerns matters of national importance that continually evolve.
• Gesicho seeks a declaration that President Kenyatta violated the Constitution.
Image: FAITH MUTEGI
The Building Bridges Initiative (BBI) has defended its formation, saying it was established for public good.
Researcher Moraa Gesicho seeks to block the team from handing over their report to President Uhuru Kenyatta before the case is heard and determined.
But in its response, the BBI, through Paul Mwangi, one of its secretaries, has asked the court to dismiss the petition, saying the taskforce was established as a matter of public interest.
"It is our firm belief that the establishment of the BBI was in the public interest and a legitimate step taken by the president to discharge his independent constitutional mandate of spearheading the realisation of the national values referred to in Article 10 of the Constitution of Kenya, including but not limited to national unity,” the affidavit reads.
He further argues that the BBI’s mandate is advisory and concerns matters of national importance that continually evolve with time and which require broad-based methodologies as envisaged by the team.
Gesicho seeks a declaration that President Kenyatta, in instructing the taskforce to make periodic written recommendations to the government, violated the Constitution. She also wants a declaration that there is a conflict of interest between the taskforce and Uhuru's official duties as President.
She says the President has not come out to account for his decision to establish the taskforce.
However, the BBI says the petition consists of generalities and is devoid of essential particulars of the breaches complained of or the constitutional provisions violated. The petition discloses no justifiable constitutional questions requiring the court’s intervention, Mwangi says.
“The establishment of the BBI was in circumstances a legitimate presidential gambit,” he adds.
The taskforce has also dismissed claims by the petitioner that the BBI has excluded some people. Mwangi says the clear mandate they have to consult with citizens, the faith-based sector, cultural leaders, the private sector and experts at both the county and national levels and further bearing in mind that the BBI's role is merely advisory, the fears of exclusion are unfounded and preemptive.
“The contentions are accordingly fallacious, retrogressive and antithetic to the Constitution," he says.
He says the BBI is not a state office and its membership has no power to decide or issue instructions on its own right.
However, they say that like any other authority discharging public functions, its membership is subject to the Constitution and oversight by the legislature and other agencies established within a constitutional framework.
(Edited by F'Orieny)