Senate in dilemma over President Uhuru Kenyatta's memo on two bills

The Senate is in a dilemma over President Uhuru Kenyatta's memorandum on two constitutional bills after he declined to sign them into law.

The standoff pitting the Executive and the bicameral Parliament, threatens to stall the legislative process, especially in the Senate, after the lawmakers demanded for further stay in unlocking it.

Senators have accused the President of overstepping his mandate and attempting to usurp the powers of Parliament when he rejected the Public Audit Bill and the Public Procurement and Asset Disposal Bill and introduced a new set of amendments.

Opposition legislators led by Minority Leader Moses Wetang'ula (Bungoma), James Orengo (Siaya), Hassan Omar (Mombasa) and Boni Khalwale (Kakamega) implored Speaker Ekwee Ethuro to seek clarification on the extent of the President's reservations concerning the bills that he rejected. The legislators' are irked with the President's decision to introduce new amendments to the controversial Public Audit Bill.

The senators have also beseeched Mr Ethuro to stay his ruling to the House to approve the bill fully, accommodating the President's reservations through a motion or pass the bill the second time, as provided for in Article 115 (4) of the Constitution.

The House's headache, according to the speaker, is the situation that would arise if it failed to garner a majority of the delegates in the Senate, or is unable to obtain the thirty-one delegates required to reject the President's reservations.

CONSTITUTIONAL PURGATORY

"It would appear that any action that does not result in an outright acceptance or rejection of the President's memorandum, would put the bill, in constitutional purgatory requiring some new action that would re-ignite and bring the legislative process to a close," Ethuro said.

Though he affirmed that the legislative process on any bill only comes to an end where there is an agreement between the Legislature and the Executive, there is need for further consultation, which may result in re-submission of the motion.

But Ethuro was quick to point out that the two bills are subject to specific timelines as stipulated in Article 261 of the Constitution as read with the Fifth Schedule of the Constitution.

Mr Wetang'ula said: "We must set precedenct for further reference. We need an expanded ruling covering all areas, including considering the President's decision to reject the bill and instead purport to introduce new clauses."

Khalwale, Wetang'ula, Wilfred Machage (Migori), Orengo and Omar in acknowledging Ethuro's Solomonic ruling, sought for clear direction in discharging their legislative mandate, faulting the Executive of trying to micro-manage the Legislature.

"Introducing new clauses in not what was envisaged in the original bills," said Wetang'ula.