TANZANIA VP RESIGNS AMID SPECULATION OVER STRAIN WITH PRESIDENT SULUHU
RUTO, GACHAGUA DRAW THE LINE ON 2027 DEAL
TREVOR, DJ SHITI TRADE BARBS OVER HEHA MOVERS MANAGEMENT
IEBC BANS CAMPAIGNS BEFORE MAY 29, 2027
Ndindi Nyoro joins opposition after UDA exit
RONALDO AND GEORGINA FLAUNT WEDDING RINGS
DIAMOND’S FORMER DJ RESCUED FROM STREETS
MUTURI REJECTS GACHAGUA’S ‘HYENA COALITION’
YUNGE’S ALLEGED EX CRIES FOUL AFTER CHARLENE’S WEDDING
Law Society of Kenya (LSK) President Faith Odhiambo is facing mounting pressure to turn down a fresh appointment by President William Ruto.
Odhiambo was named Vice Chairperson of a newly formed Panel of Experts tasked with verifying, categorizing, and compensating victims of demonstrations and public protests. However, almost immediately after the announcement, civil society groups, lawyers, and political commentators urged her to reject the post, warning that it could damage her integrity and independence.
The Atheists in Kenya Society cautioned that the position risked undermining her hard-earned reputation. “Building a solid reputation takes hard work, patience, and time. But it only takes one wrong move to ruin it,” the group said in a statement.
Lawyer Miguna Miguna dismissed the panel as a government ploy, accusing the LSK boss and Amnesty International Kenya’s Irungu Houghton—also appointed—to a “cover-up” that could re-victimize protest victims. Another lawyer, Levi Munyeri, described the move as a possible public relations stunt, warning of reputational risks.
Online commentators also joined the criticism, with some accusing the government of attempting to capture critical civil society voices.
The panel has been tasked with designing a framework for compensation, authenticating victim data from institutions such as IPOA and KNCHR, and recommending accountability measures to the ODPP.
This is not the first time Odhiambo has been caught in a storm over a presidential appointment. In July 2024, she rejected her nomination to a public debt audit taskforce, terming it unconstitutional and insisting that the Auditor-General held the exclusive mandate to conduct such audits.
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!