The punctuation mark can win or lose a court case

NAIROBI: Prof Karori Mbugua and Prof Mauri Yambo, University of Nairobi lecturers of Philosophy and Sociology respectively, never tire of reminding their students that syllogism is a type of logical reasoning which demands that if you concur with the first two statements, then you have no option but to agree with the third one as well, thus making the argument factually and logically valid. For example, in this kind of thinking, which is from general to specific, one would argue: All those with Bachelor of Laws are literate; all magistrates in Kenya have LLB; accordingly, all magistrates in this country are literate.

So in the wake of the recent report by the Council of Legal Education Quality Assurance and Compliance Committee that revealed that the state of legal education in some universities is wanting, and in the light of the latest revelation by Sharad Rao’s Judges and Magistrates Vetting Board that many magistrates are incapable of writing judgements in sound grammatical English, the first premise is wrong. The incorrect proposition makes the conclusion unacceptable, rendering the whole argument factually faulty and, as a result, invalid.