On 28/01/2011,
toby@law-democracy.org <
toby@law-democracy.org> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I hope you will not mind if I make a few comments on yesterday's
> discussion before moving on to the topic of today. Sorry to be late again,
> but I'm sort of in transit (actually, I spent 12 hours in plane yesterday,
> only to return to my starting point because we could not land at the
> destination!).
>
> The Bill does provide for the appointment of the Chair (section 8(6 or
> really (7)), but I agree that it would be preferable for the group to
> appoint its own Chair and this is a common practice.
>
> A few comments on the debate about independence, on the one hand, and the
> role of the judiciary, on the other. I am very sensitive to Lydia's point
> about capture of these bodies by government and of course the Rwandan
> Council is a disaster on this point. But to be honest, that was one area
> where I felt this draft Bill was pretty good. Of course its independence
> rests heavily on the independence of the judicial bodies and individuals
> involved, but otherwise, it does have reasonably robust systems, including
> the ability of anyone, or any group, to nominate and then the shortlisting
> by the appointing Committee (although I would remove the representatives
> from the Ministry of Justice and State Law Office from this Committee and
> replace them with more independent people, probably not from the media,
> since the other three members are already media representatives). So I see
> the approach as a bit of a trade-off: perhaps excessive role for the
> judiciary v. relatively strong guarantees of independence. I note that the
> role of the JSC is simply to establish the appointing Committee. I'm not
> sure which other body could be trusted with this.
>
> So, my tweaks would be to change the composition of the appointing
> Committee (which is the most important decision-maker in this process),
> allow the body to elect its own chair and remove the requirement for the
> chair to be eligible for appointment as a High Court judge.
>
> On today's questions:
>
> 1) Grace is right to point out the duplication and to some extent
> contradiction between sections 7 and 10. Probably they should be
> integrated.
>
> 2) I have already commented on the Chair. I don't see a particular problem
> with the Chair being reappointed, but there should at least be another
> election.
>
> Best, Toby
>
>
> ___________________________________
> Toby Mendel
>
> Centre for Law and Democracy
>
toby@law-democracy.org
> Tel: +1 902 431-3688
> Fax: +1 902 431-3689
>
www.law-democracy.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> kictanet mailing list
>
kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke
>
http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
>