I hear that Wako has sneaked in a new clause in the draft constitution. Who knows more on this issue??

Is there anything wrong with the clause coz am reading it and it seems fine. But anyway, the fact that it wasn't there and it now is paints a very bad picture

Kwanza how will Wako (AG) be fired? The proposed constitution is very clear on how to appoint but does not state how to dismiss even though it says who can dismiss.

Look at the articles and what they say:

Article 132 (2) The President shall nominate and, with the approval of the National Assembly, appoint, and may dismiss —
(b) the Attorney-General, in accordance with Article 156;

Article 156 says nothing about the dismissal of the AG, his tenure or resignation.

156. (1) There is established the office of Attorney-General.
(2) The Attorney-General shall be nominated by the President and, with the approval of the National Assembly, appointed by the President.
(3) The qualifications for appointment as Attorney-General are the same as for appointment to the office of Chief Justice.
(4) The Attorney-General—
(a) is the principal legal adviser to the Government;
(b) shall represent the national government in court or in any other legal proceedings to which the national government is a party, other than criminal proceedings;
and
(c) shall perform any other functions conferred on the office by an Act of Parliament or by the President.
(5) The Attorney-General shall have authority, with the leave of the court, to appear as a friend of the court in any civil proceedings to which the Government is not a party.
(6) The Attorney-General shall promote, protect and uphold the rule of law and defend the public interest.
(7) The powers of the Attorney-General may be exercised in person or by subordinate officers acting in accordance with general or special instructions.
It will therefore be unconstitutional under the Proposed draft for a President to dismiss an AG or to even force him to resign.

If the Attorney General cannot be dismissed, cannot be sacked or even forced to resign, then it means we will have created an Imperial AG's office.

@FundamentAli, please enlighten us where. i will gladly take my words back.

@Masukuma
Good, if that is the case, then we can now sack AG without subjecting him through a tribunal like other office holders like Auditor General, Controller-Budget or Commissioners appointed under the constitution(Article 251 of the draft).

Current constitution provides for formation of a tribunal to recommend whether or not to remove the AG (Section 109(6)).

Article 260 of the draft includes AG as holder of state office, while Article 75(2) provides grounds for removal or dismissal of state officers.

@masukuma,

hii ni maneno kweli

The qualification for appointment of the AG is the same as that of a CJ. It is silent on the AG removal from office. The CJ serve for a period of ten year. I will go through my old draft and see whether there was an omission

some copies have an additional
24 (1) (d) to limit the Bill of Rights in cases the government deems “prejudicial to National Security.” - NASTY!!!