[2011] KESC 2 (KLR)

[2011] KESC 2 (KLR)

The Supreme Court determined that, given the urgency and public importance of the application for an advisory opinion by the Commission for the Implementation of the Constitution, it was necessary to issue directions to ensure an expeditious and fair hearing. The Court granted audience to interested parties (KMJA and KPTJ), set timelines for written submissions and oral highlights, and provided for public access to the motion. The Court also established procedures for any person or group wishing to participate or raise jurisdictional issues, emphasizing the need for transparency and broad participation in matters of constitutional implementation. These directions were grounded in the...

Citation
[2011] KESC 2 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Commission for the Implementation of the Constitution; Respondent: Attorney General; Respondent: Kenya Magistrates and Judges Association (KMJA); Respondent: Kenyans for Peace, Truth and Justice (KPTJ)
Court
Supreme Court
Court Station
Supreme Court of Kenya
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
5 April 2011
Case Number
Constitutional Application 1 of 2011
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Application / Directions
Outcome
Directions issued for the hearing of the motion for advisory opinion.
Judges
PK Tunoi, SEO Bosire, EO O'Kubasu, EM Githinji, PN Waki
Legal Topics
Advisory Opinions, Court Jurisdiction, Implementation of Constitution
Source Language
English
Constitutional Law Advisory Opinions Court Jurisdiction Implementation of Constitution

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Commission for the Implementation of the Constitution

Applicant

Attorney General

Respondent

Kenya Magistrates and Judges Association (KMJA)

Respondent

Kenyans for Peace, Truth and Justice (KPTJ)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Application / Directions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Supreme Court should issue directions on the hearing of an application for an advisory opinion under Article 163(6) of the Constitution.
  2. 2 Whether interested parties such as KMJA and KPTJ should be granted audience in the proceedings.
  3. 3 What procedures should govern the hearing of the motion for advisory opinion.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court determined that, given the urgency and public importance of the application for an advisory opinion by the Commission for the Implementation of the Constitution, it was necessary to issue directions to ensure an expeditious and fair hearing. The Court granted audience to interested parties (KMJA and KPTJ), set timelines for written submissions and oral highlights, and provided for public access to the motion. The Court also established procedures for any person or group wishing to participate or raise jurisdictional issues, emphasizing the need for transparency and broad participation in matters of constitutional implementation. These directions were grounded in the...

Court Disposition

Directions issued for the hearing of the motion for advisory opinion.

Orders

  • The motion shall be heard for three consecutive days commencing on 11/4/2011.
  • KMJA and KPTJ are granted a right of audience at the hearing.