Recently, the impeachment of Deputy President Hon. Rigathi Gachagua stirred significant debate among the general public and the elite in Kenya.
Many argue that the impeachment is politically motivated and that the final decision should be based more on political considerations than legal principles.
This controversy has raised concerns about Kenya’s commitment to the rule of law and whether politics should supersede legal authority.
As a student of legal philosophy and a leadership professional, I am compelled to explore whether law and politics can be separated, especially in a nation that aims to be an example of constitutional democracy.
Impeachment is a political and legal tool for removing public officials from office. Its purpose is to protect the public office from misconduct, malice, and failure to meet constitutional obligations.
The impeachment of Deputy President Gachagua has intensified the debate over the relationship between law and politics.
Although the impeachment process followed constitutional procedures, concerns have emerged about the speed of the decision, suggesting what could be described as a ‘Political Impeachment,’ where political motivations appear to override legal processes.
Under Articles 144 and 145 of Kenya’s 2010 Constitution, Parliament has seven days to pass an impeachment motion. However, this motion was rushed in two days, with sessions running from 9:00 AM to midnight.
READ RELATED: Gachagua’s Impeachment: What Can Tanzania Learn from Kenya’s Democracy?
Similarly, the Senate allowed ten days for deliberation and concluded the process within eight days, even though the Deputy President fell ill and was not given time for a proper hearing and cross-examination as prescribed by law.
According to the constitutional procedures outlined in Articles 144, 145, 149, and 150, the President has 14 days to propose a successor, and Parliament has 60 days to approve.
However, these timelines were also expedited, with the nomination and parliamentary approval happening in hours, not even a day. Let it be read the hours of the day, not even a day.
This rapid pace has raised questions about why there was such urgency when the Constitution provides a more measured approach.
The urgency of the impeachment process has reignited the broader debate over whether law and politics can be separated or if political expediency should sometimes take precedence despite the constitutional time allocated.
Proponents of an expedited process argue that delaying it could lead to a constitutional crisis, especially if more severe issues arise.
The Deputy President’s impeachment illustrates the complex dynamics at play. Many argue that the ruling should prioritize political stability rather than strict adherence to legal principles.
This raises critical questions about whether the law can truly accommodate national affairs or if political considerations are inherently necessary.
This contention, the unfolding events, and their varied interpretations lead me to present my perspective on law and politics in the following submission.
Law and politics are inherently intertwined. The laws encompass the set of binding rules and standards that govern societal behaviour, established through legislation and enforced by government authority.
The law reflects the ruling class’s will and is designed to protect political and economic interests. It not only expresses politics but also mirrors socioeconomic systems. Socioeconomic transformation cannot occur without engaging with politics, just as political discussions are incomplete without considering the role of law.
Laws, therefore, become central to political success. Imagine a political system devoid of legal constraints. How would governance, social relations, or democratic principles be maintained?
Efforts to separate law from politics contradict various legal theories and philosophies. Individual interests could dominate in a nation where law is divorced from politics, hindering social transformation and fostering disunity.
Alienating law from politics could obstruct socioeconomic progress, disrupt democratic life, and undermine human dignity. Conversely, integrating law and politics promotes prosperity and stability.
According to the social engineering theory of law, legal systems should facilitate social change. Laws must be wisely crafted, diligently enforced and regularly reviewed to align with societal needs and promote economic prosperity.
St. Thomas Aquinas described the law as “an ordinance of reason for the common good, made by him who has care of the community.” For a nation to progress, it must uphold the rule of law and adapt its legal frameworks to evolving social demands.
The rigid separation of laws from politics could lead to legal formalism, in which leadership becomes deceptive, and governance lacks transparency.
An objective examination of law and politics reveals that their connection can guide a nation toward greatness or mislead future generations.
In this era of law, order, and human rights, failing to assess the relationship between laws and politics carefully leaves society without a clear path forward.
Understanding the law’s interpretation requires asking whether the letter or the spirit of the law matters more in legal enforcement.
The answer to this question is fundamental to constitutional law and enforcement. Interpreting the law requires a deep understanding of the governing party’s policies, as the spirit of the law is rooted in these policies.
ALSO READ Scandal and Corruption: How Tanzania’s Judiciary Is Hijacked by Political Elites
Laws serve not merely as enforcers but as facilitators of policy objectives, ensuring that political visions materialize effectively.
Legal frameworks are born through this synergy, forming the foundation for rules and regulations. While law is often associated with punishment, its true purpose transcends retribution; it catalyses social change, shaping society through structured governance.
Since law inherently reflects political ideologies, its understanding and enforcement require insight into the political system.
Therefore, law and politics are inseparable. Political insight is fundamental to understanding the spirit of the law and its societal application.
The judiciary is a fundamental enforcement pillar, requiring judicial officers to have a sophisticated understanding of political and ideological contexts.
Without this awareness, the judiciary risks impeding societal progress. Rigid legal interpretation, detached from broader political and social realities, can lead to legal formalism, hindering national development.
This tension is evident in the current impeachment process, where legal professionals appear torn between adhering strictly to the law and considering political implications.
It is a philosophical stance that law, not politics, shapes political discourse. Judges must exercise wisdom beyond legal technicalities to uphold the law’s true essence.
Nations are fundamentally defined by law, not political dynamics. Thus, judgments should prioritize legal principles over political interests, affirming the reality that law forms the foundation of a nation.
A high political and ideological awareness level is essential for properly enforcing the laws. Legal outcomes depend significantly on the perspectives of those enforcing them.
While lawyers inherently engage with political matters, not all politicians are lawyers. In developing nations, particularly in Africa, laws must be essential to development, economic welfare, and societal prosperity.
In many African nations, legal systems are often regarded as mere suggestions. However, for Africa to progress, we must pay close attention to how legal systems are created, interpreted, and implemented.
National unity, democracy, and social harmony depend on the central role of law in political life.
In conclusion, laws and politics are inseparable. The laws drive societal development and governance, and to think otherwise invites disorder.
As B.R. Ambedkar aptly stated, “Laws and order are the medicine of the body politic, and when the body politic gets sick, medicine must be administered.”
The solution to socio-political challenges lies in the laws.
When law is neglected or improperly applied, political crises transform into legal ones. Given the current situation, Kenya must uphold the rule of law at all costs, as it remains the nation’s primary source of unity.
Kenya’s unity lies not in the body politic but in the body of law, and only in law will they be united.
Liberty and happiness may be yours!
