Economist David Ndii and ODM secretary general Edwin Sifuna were on Thursday in a twitter spat over a petition filed in court likely to stall the Building Bridges Initiative (BBI).
Sifuna said the petition should be thrown out as it is a “poorly” drafted “academic thesis disguised as pleadings.”
“Some “activists” filed an academic thesis disguised as pleadings. You will not see more poorly drafted, nebulous, theoretical musings than that so called petition. Instead of the 3 Judge bench they want, the CJ shd save time and money and dismiss the thing in limine,” Sifuna wrote.
Ndii on his part said a law degree should be a second degree, adding that the lawyer does not “know now his Dworkin from his Hart.”
Ronald Dworkin argues that moral principles that people hold dear are often wrong, even to the extent that certain crimes are acceptable if one’s principles are skewed enough.
This one does not seem to know his Dworkin from his Hart. Technician. Law really ought to be a second degree. https://t.co/IR9Ovwh2re
— David Ndii (@DavidNdii) September 17, 2020
Sifuna on his part urged the economist to instead share the court papers on his blog.
“My brother… Court papers are not economic theory. That conference presentation you filed will be thrown out faster than you can say 2nd degree. You should just have posted it on that blog of yours along with your other musings on dynasties,” he said.
Ndii alongside four others; Jerotich Seii, James Ngondi, Wanjiku Gikonyo and Ikal Angelei, want the court to declare Chapter Nine of the Constitution (Executive) “unamendable” either by Parliament or through a referendum.
They also want Chapter One on Sovereignty of the People and Supremacy of the Constitution, Chapter Two on The Republic, Chapter Four on the Bill of Rights and Chapter Ten on the Judiciary, declared unamendable.
The petitioners have listed Attorney General, Speaker of the National Assembly, Speaker of the Senate and the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission as the respondents in the petition.
“Recent developments in Kenya’s legislative history confirm a threatened abrogation, contravention and violation of the five chapters of the Constitution and in particular Articles 256 and 257 by the respondents,” the petition reads.