TSC shouldn’t withdraw Knut contempt charges

On July 1, 2013, the Industrial Court declared the just-concluded teachers’ strike illegal and ordered Knut to call it off and engage in negotiations. Knut defied this directive. It was reported that one of the Government’s concessions was that the Teachers Service Commission (TSC) would drop the contempt of court charges on condition the union ended the strike. This horse-trading between Government, TSC and Knut sets a precedent that is as worrying as it is irregular.

The courts’ powers to punish for contempt are drawn from Section 5 of the Judicature Act and the primary objective is to uphold the authority and dignity of the courts. The practice is that in civil cases, parties in the suit move the court to punish contempt whereas in criminal cases, the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) would institute the charges. However, numerous court decisions have settled on the fact that a court may, on its own motion, initiate contempt proceedings.

This means courts are not relegated to spectator status as orders are flouted with impunity simply because a party or the DPP does not initiate contempt proceedings.

When court orders are flagrantly disobeyed and dismissed, it is not just the parties to the case that are affected. Members of the public, who have an interest in due administration of justice, are also injured by the contempt.

To ignore public sentiments in such cases is to begin sowing seeds of disorder in future and to seriously dent the authority of the courts in the eyes of citizens. Therefore, when some officials view a court order as non-consequential, it is not the judge’s feelings that are injured. Rather, it is the rule of law and judicial authority under attack.

The rule of law is not limited to how courts interpret the law but also how the law is enforced. An independent judiciary must authoritatively interpret and enforce the law because power to punish for contempt of court is at the heart of exercise of judicial authority.

Legal scholars and practitioners are in agreement that a court of justice without power to vindicate its own dignity, to enforce obedience to its orders, to protect its officers or shield those who are entrusted to its care, would be an anomaly which cannot be permitted to exist in any civilised community.

Every Kenyan should be anxious to safeguard due administration of justice. That is why TSC must not withdraw but allow the Industrial Court to rule on the contempt of court proceedings. Obeying the law cannot be reduced to an option or a bargaining tool in trade disputes. How the court handles this matter will either encourage or discourage disobedience of court orders.

{Edward Kahuthia, Nairobi}

The subtle manner in which the Government outwitted teachers depicted a well organised scheme. Think of it, the Government first divided teachers. KUPPET was the soft landing base that proved the cornerstone for the Government-versus-teachers battle. Once cornered, Knut’s neck dangled on the suicide rope and they had to accept the Sh16.2 billion deal in two phases. As if that was not enough, Knut’s leaders stared at jail over contempt of court charges.

{Nickson O Magak, Kisumu}