Paul Mwangi wanted to be a Catholic priest when he was growing up, thanks to influence from his maternal uncle who was a Father in the church.
His dad, who was a magistrate, could hear none of it. Mwangi spent his childhood oscillating between the church and his father’s chambers, but ended up being a lawyer.
The 54-year-old family man from Othaya may not be a priest, but he admires men of the cloth, and in another life, he would join a seminary.
The influence of his father grew stronger with time: He was a magistrate in [former President Daniel] Moi’s administration.
Mwangi, who has been a legal adviser to ODM leader Raila Odinga since December 2011, sat down with the Star for a conversation.
When Mwangi came of age and started lawyering, he picked up from where his dad left and rolled-up his sleeves for multi-party democracy struggle.
He has undertaken big and daring cases, including one in early 90s seeking to bar Moi from contesting for the presidency in 1992. His argument was that Moi had served two terms and was not eligible for a third one under the repealed Constitution.
“Just like my dad, my practice of law is based on pursuing and doing what is right, no matter how popular or less popular it is. In this case, it was my conviction that the Constitution had prohibited Moi from running for a third time,” he said. “Even though we lost, we made our point.”
His contemporaries call him a rhino because he sticks to the line he picks until he gets what he wants.
He was 24 years old at the time.
Another big case was when he appeared alongside veteran senior lawyer Pheroz Nowrojee to argue an election petition filed by Siaya Senator James Orengo challenging President Moi’s 1992 electoral win.
In 1996, Mwangi humbled Africa's largest Multi National corporation Lonrho in court when it sold Standard Newspaper. He represented all workers of Standard Newspaper to protect their pension funds.
His litigation also forced Capital Trustees who managed the funds to transfer the same to an independent pension fund where workers were represented.
As part of the action, the management of Standard Newspapers was almost jailed for contempt of court when they fired the workers representatives who had filed the case following industrial action at the paper as the workers demanded their own independent pension fund.
Besides being a lawyer, Mwangi is an ardent writer with different titles to his name.
His writing started out when he served as editor-in-chief of the University of Nairobi Law Journal, and then the Nairobi Law monthly as editor-in-chief.
But in all the briefs Mwangi has undertaken over his 30 years career, he seems to relish serving as Raila’s adviser, starting with when he (Raila) was the prime minister and thereafter joining the Raila Odinga Secretariat.
I love serving Mzee, he said, explaining that though he believed he had a revolutionary mind, “meeting Raila made me feel I was not revolutionary enough.”
"When I met Raila I had to repeat two classes in reform school," he jokes before bursting into loud laughter.
Mwangi replaced Miguna Miguna, who had bitterly fallen out with Raila and published damaging books on his tenure.
Mwangi marks 10 years this weekend alongside the former prime minister. So what does he do differently from Miguna?
“When you are an adviser, you know and settle in your place. You must also know that you are not the only adviser Mzee listens to,” he said.
“You know, Mzee is a politician and me I don’t know how to get the votes. That's the work of the politicians. My brief is to make the law facilitative so he gets the votes or whatever his objectives are,” the lawyer said.
“If you advise all over, you are bound to conflict with others because you will step into domains that don’t belong to you,” he added.
Mwangi paints a picture of a job of his dream, saying that Raila consults him regularly, is clear on his vision, and his heart is always after doing what is good and right.
“Mzee listens a lot, but he is wise. You explain your advice and then he tells you why that can’t work given the realities of politics or the subject under discussion.”
"To be clear, working as a legal adviser to Mzee has been the most fulfilling professional engagement I've ever had," he added.
2013 petition
Mwangi’s most memorable assignment as Raila’s lawyer is the 2013 election petition in the Supreme Court.
He feels the court, manned at the time by retired Chief Justice Willy Mutunga, denied them justice “and that is why he [the former CJ] is haunted by guilt over the case.”
The Supreme Court dismissed the petition that challenged President Uhuru Kenyatta’s win in 2013.
Although Raila accepted the verdict, together with supporters they have continued to claim injustice, accusing Mutunga of betraying them.
Mutunga has maintained that he led the court in justly determining the case given the evidence and circumstances.
The former CJ also recently told a media outlet the attacks by politicians based on the 2013 ruling affected his family.
But Mwangi, though saying they moved on, feels pained that the Mutunga court struck out their 900-page affidavit and evidence that allegedly showed Uhuru’s votes were inflated by 80,000 votes.
“You don’t decide such a case on a technicality. We filed that affidavit late because the IEBC refused to give us the polling station files and we had to seek a High Court order to compel it, within the 14 days window of the petition. The court ruled in our favour and the IEBC gave us the documents and so we had to collate them and consolidate them into the affidavit. How could the court not consider these frustration?”
He goes on, "[The affidavit contained] the votes we needed to explain that Uhuru had crossed the 50 per cent plus one mark with 5,400 votes and we were knocking of 80,000 votes."
Mwangi believes that if the court had admitted their affidavit, their petition would have succeeded and the political matrix would have been different.
"[Mutunga] knew what was in those files and that's why he rejected them," he claimed.
Asked why his camp has not moved on close to 10 years down the line, Mwangi said that his boss has moved on, "but the supporters have not forgiven him [the former CJ]."
"But even [the former CJ] Mutunga himself has not moved on. He keeps talking about the case and even lately claimed that it was the reason he aligns himself with the [Deputy President William] Ruto team."
"But there is something with him when it comes to Raila. Maybe he will tell us, or history."
But for all the slack, Mwangi believes that Mutunga is a man of integrity and not financially corrupt.
"I believe he is not financially corrupt but he failed at the critical moment. There was something he feared."
Judicialisation of politics
Apparently, Mwangi's beef with the former CJ is not yet over.
Besides the 2013 case, he complained that Mutunga was allegedly mobilising the civil society to implement a project he calls judicialisation of politics.
"It started during his time. Check some of the judges he installed and how they have been deciding cases recently. It's part of this agenda," Mwangi said.
The advocate believes that the activists are bent on eroding the principle of separation of powers and they want a new set of rules where the Judiciary has a direct play in the country's political nuances.
"When you ask them, they are saying the new Constitution brought a new meaning to separation of powers and they don't elaborate further. I'd want this subject brought to public debate."
Citing instances where Mutunga allegedly called on activists to venture into politics and take over power, Mwangi thinks the overall end game is to have the possibility of a former Chief Justice one day being installed as president.
"In fact, I can say I believe Mutunga has been playing with the idea of running for president," he said.
He said the repeated cases where judges ruled against the Executive was a precursor to this.
"Recently, the court ruled against Uhuru Park's renovation, claiming there was no public participation. So what do you ask people about, the field? So what is the role of the government then?" Mwangi posed.
The environment court had stopped the renovation of the park on the grounds that the environmental impact assessment had not been done. The case was brought by Communist party.
Asked whether the constant setbacks the Executive suffers in court were an indictment on the competence of the Attorney General and state lawyers, Mwangi said the AG was free of blame.
"I would not judge the AG. The problem is this project of judicialisation of our politics. The Judiciary is overreaching and wants to be a major player in our political arrangement."
"But they must be fought," he said, and in the end, they won't succeed.
Mwangi argued that the concept had been applied in India where the Judiciary would extend its influence beyond normal bounds.
The peak of it, he said, was when the India executive differed with the country's Chief Justice at the time, making the latter resign and venture into politics, going for its PM position.
"While some of these activists may hail India as a vibrant democracy where the Judiciary has no restraint, look at its social outcome. The country has millions and millions of people in demeaning state of abject poverty."
"The government must be let to be and do it work, including social reforms it deems fit without judicial overreach.'
Edited by A.N
