This archive report was first published on 3 September 2021.
On September 3, 2021, Attorney General Paul Kihara Kariuki submitted a notice of appeal to the Supreme Court, challenging the verdict of the Court of Appeal on the Building Bridges Initiative (BBI).
The AG is seeking to have the apex court address eight key issues that made the Court of Appeal overturn President Uhuru Kenyatta's bid to amend the Constitution.
Among the contentious issues, Kariuki is aggrieved with the court's declaration that the Basic Structure doctrine is applicable in Kenya and that the doctrine limits the power of the constitutional amendments set out in Articles 255 to 257.
He is also fighting the court's finding that the Basic Structure of the Constitution of Kenya can only be altered through the primary constituent power, which must include four sequential processes.
Additionally, the AG is dissatisfied with the Court of Appeal decision that the President can be sued during his tenure of office in respect of anything done or not done contrary to the Constitution.
Moreover, Kariuki is against the decision by the appellate court, which declared that the President does not have authority to initiate changes to the Constitution and that the constitutional amendment can only be initiated through a Parliamentary means under article 256 or through a popular initiative under Article 257 of the Constitution.
The AG is further challenging the declaration that the BBI process contravened the Constitution - in particular, Article 10.
Furthermore, Kariuki is fighting a finding that the second schedule of the Constitution of Kenya Ammendment Bill, 2020, was unconstitutional in so far as it purported to predetermine the allocation of the proposed 70 new constituencies.
He also faults and is attempting to overturn the court's decision to direct the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission on its functions of constituency delimitation.
The final contentious issue presented by the AG is his dissatisfaction with the appellate court's ruling that the constitutional amendment process was unconstitutional and usurpation of the People's exercise of sovereign power.
