THE THREE JUDGE BENCH HAVE MUCH IN COMMON WITH THE TROJAN PRINCE (PARIS).

Jean-Jacques-Rousseau (1712 - 1778) once said that “The general will is always straight, but the judgment that guides it is not always enlightened”. In trying to underscore the import of the above adage, one can draw some parallel from the “Judgment of Paris”, a Greek mythology whose impact on literature has been incalculably great. Its major characters, though shrouded in the distant past, exhibit personality flaws and strengths that are as real for people today as when the work first appeared. The myth revolves around a Trojan prince (Paris), who was called on to judge which was the most attractive of the goddesses Hera, Athena and Aphrodite. Offered the bribes of power by Hera, success in battle by Athena, or the most beautiful woman in the world by Aphrodite, he chose the last. Aphrodite then helped him abduct Helen, so causing the Trojan War and earning the hatred of both Hera and Athena for the Trojans. First, the moral story of this myth is that people (including judges like Paris) are corruptible. This is because the intellect is always at a high risk of being fooled by the heart. In such circumstances, many men and women of good standing find themselves succumbing to material temptations. Secondly, a judge whose moral standing is questionable may unwittingly make a ruling which commits the entire nation on pain of logical inconsistency so much so that hatred and animosity drives a wedge between neighbors. In Kenya we have our own Trojan Prince in the name of the constitutional court whose ruling on the constitutionality of the Kadhis court has aroused considerable indignation and anger both in equal measures. Unfortunately though, this ruling is likely to engender religious intolerance which is a recipe for disaster in our fragile country that has barely healed form the 2008 Post Election Violence. Like Hera and Athena our Muslim brothers and sisters are crying foul for what they consider a cold neutrality of the three judge bench. The Yes Team also reads mischief in the whole saga. They see this ruling as a ploy to derail the review process. In their estimation, this particular judgment is politically motivated and it is thus far removed from impartiality. Some people have even opined that the court`s judgment is a pointer to the fear that has gripped the entire bench should the proposed draft constitution be promulgated. The fear is informed by the fact that there is a provision in the draft that requires a section of the judiciary to resign six months after the promulgation of the constitution for a thorough judicial purge. There is a real danger that like Paris, the prince, the members of the bench may have eloped with the No Team. The ruling could just be one among the many in the “No Team`s bag of tricks”. But even with the on going intrigues, the Yes Team should not despair. They must Like Abraham Lincoln, continually remind the electorate that “The true rule, in determining to embrace, or reject any thing, is not whether it has any evil in it; but whether it has more of evil, than of good. There are few things wholly evil, or wholly good. Almost every thing, especially of governmental policy, is an inseparable compound of the two; so that our best judgment of the preponderance between them is continually demanded.” TOME FRANCIS, BUMULA. http://twitter.com/tomefrancis