“The evidence we seek to adduce provide a detailed analysis by parliament of the BBI Bill for its constitutional and legal validity. Of particular relevance is parliament’s recommendation that a legal framework was required for amending the constitution through a popular initiative,” said Mutuma. Mutuma submitted that both Senate and National Assembly debated the BBI Constitutional Amendment Bill when they had already finished their arguments at the High Court and could not submit it at the time. Under the Court of Appeal practice rules, a party cannot adduce additional evidence that were not part of the High Court records unless he makes an application before the Appellate Court. According to the judges, the absence of legislation or legal framework to govern the collection, presentation and verification of signatures and the conduct of referendum made the BBI process flawed.

Source: Standard Digital June 14, 2021 21:00 UTC