Ruinous Judicial activism

What a Solemn Scrutiny of the Ruling of Justice Mumbi Ngugi in the Moses Kasaine Lenolkulal Case Reveals

Abstract

eturn to office or removal of a public or state officer when charged under the Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Act (ACECA) has become and remains one of the active questions in Kenyan courts after renewed energies on the part of the government to ‘fight graft’. This question has generated debates whose terms seem to be very different following a decision that was issued by Justice Mumbi Ngugi over a revision application by the Governor of Samburu County, Moses Kasaine Lenolkulal in a casehe had been charged. This article is an attempt at critically analysing the said ruling which has been hailed not only as being progressive but alsoas showing that Kenyan courts are treating corruption with the phobia itdeserves. The analysis demonstrates that despite the noble ideas behind judicial support for war against graft, judicial officers need to be more careful not to venture into what can be described as ruinous activism as the Moses Kasaine Lenolkulal ruling has now revealed.