“A Meru man is not allowed to break in public.” , Linturi’s legal representative, Muthomi Thiankolu, urge him to draw strength from his Meru heritage. He was facing a parliamentary committee on both allegations and accusations of orchestrating purchase and sale of fake fertilizer to farmers.
According to the impeachment motion, Linturi is accused of criminal negligence in allowing NCPB to be used by private firms to supply fake fertilizers. Secondly, the motion alleges that Linturi contravened principles of good governance, accountability and integrity for refusing to take responsibility of national destabilization and lowering of confidence in the Ruto Administration.
Finally, he is accused to have failed to account to the president and the Ruto administration. He has allegedly failed to account on the food security matter by failing to provide a report on farmers impacted and measures to restore food security in the country.
Citing Articles 46, 152[6] and 153[2], the National Assembly passed a motion to commence his impeachment despite the Majority leader pointing out that the Ruto administration’s position was that the parliamentary committee on agriculture was already conducting an investigation into the matter which in turn meant Linturi was a victim of double jeopardy. The Majority leader also implored that the motion before the house failed to support its allegations and accusation based on Section 4 of the State Corporations Act on ministerial responsibility for state corporations and the assigning authority.
The concept of collective responsibility in politics requires that all members of the cabinet(including CS) are collectively responsible for government decisions and policies. When a decision is made by the cabinet, all cabinet secretaries are expected to publicly support it, even if they personally disagree. This ensures a unified front and prevents internal divisions.
However, this principle can lead to situations where individual CSs are held accountable for decisions they may not have directly influenced or agreed with. This may lead to false accusations in performing ministerial roles. CSs can be falsely accused due to their association with collective responsibility. If a policy fails or a scandal occurs, blame may fall on the entire cabinet, including individual CSs.
According to Article 153 of the constitution, a decision by the Cabinet shall be in writing. Cabinet Secretaries are accountable individually, and collectively, to the president for the exercise of their powers and the performance of their functions. A cabinet secretary shall attend before a committee of the national assembly, or the Senate, when required by the committee, and answer any question concerning a matter for which the cabinet secretary is responsible. Cabinet Secretaries shall act in accordance with the constitution; and provide parliament with full and regular reports concerning matters under their control.
Media sensationalization and collective guilt has led to scapegoating Linturi. While baying for oversight victory by execution of victims, parliament subjects Linturi to double jeopardy. Media sensationalization and collective guilt can lead to the rise of mob jurists. In societies where laws exist freedom of expression lacks legitimacy if it seeks to negate other rights and is harmful to itself.
When members of the public, acting outside the legal system, attempt to pass judgment or enforce laws according to the whims of a group or mob and seek to sanitize by institutional frameworks, our hypocrisy as a nation is boldly highlighted. Social media has resolved to employ extrajudicial measures to violate the principles of justice in funning the flames of impeachment. The National Assembly has also followed with its group-thinking by letting its decisions to be influenced by the collective opinion of the group, often without individual reasoning. The leader of majority sites lack of due process since the National Assembly is eager to overrule investigations by the agriculture committee in syncing cosmetic fairness and transparency, while playing homage to the mob jurists.
The activities of mob jurists pose serious challenges to the rule of law. They can undermine justice, lead to chaos, and destroy the very fabric of orderly society. Historically, such behaviors have led to wrongful punishments and are often seen in situations where trust in formal judicial processes is either lacking or has been eroded.
The parliamentarians can not afford the Mob Jurists their bet. The Jurisprudence of Evidence Law is not principled on frissons of public excitement or public condemnation. More often than not is is based and founded from preponderance. While we may not be privy to written consents, Linturi might have been instrumental in the bumper harvest announced by the president during the soil summit.
