Deputy President William Ruto has castigated the Building Bridges Initiative (BBI) yet again, saying that the document is taking the country back to the late President Daniel Moi’s era.
In an interview with one of the media houses, the second in command said the attempt to amend the Constitution through the Constitutional Amendment Bill 2020 is not advisable as it taking the country back instead of forward.
He explained that the Constitution, which has been debated for months now, can only be changed through the rule of law.
He argued that the country came from a hybrid system where Members of Parliament were also Ministers, and leaders argued that it was an incestuous system that made accountability difficult.
“And now BBI is actually taking us back to where Moi left the Constitution,” he said during the interview.
DP William Ruto also appeared to support the High Court ruling on BBI being unconstitutional, null and void.
He said that as things stand at the moment, BBI is illegal, null and void to the extent that the court has ruled.
He added that leaders should not set a precedence that one can change the Constitution using unconstitutional and unlawful means as the move is always dangerous.
Ruto stated opined that one cannot change the Constitution the way they want in the matter that they want to the extent which they want because they have power, influence and can use mechanisms.
He explained that by doing that, one sets a very dangerous President that the next person with power, influence and money, can come and change the Constitution leading to anarchy.
He maintained that BBI was looking to change the Constitution in a substantial manner and that the country can only remain a sane, democratic country by following the court’s orders.
He added that leaders must be careful because the Constitution is not a textbook or an essay.
DP Willaim Ruto also weighed on the six judges that were rejected by President Uhuru Kenyatta as he went on to appoint the other 34.
He said that former Chief Justices Willy Mutunga and David Maraga had said that the right thing that should have happened was for all judges to be appointed, and if there were any irregularities, then the right process should have been followed to determine their case.