City lawyer now opposes 3-judge bench in GMO case

A nairobi lawyer has opposed the empanelment of a bench to hear and determine petitions challenging the government’s plan to allow importation and distribution of genetically modified organisms (GMOs).

Lawyer Paul Mwangi who opposed the application filed by Attorney General Justin Muturi for empanelment of a bench, argued that a single Judge bench is of equal force to a three-judge bench to determine complex issues where a matter addresses well established principle of interpretation of constitutional provisions.

Through lawyer Wairimu Njoroge, he argued before High Court Judge Mugure Thande that the petitions address well established principles of constitutional interpretation. “Indeed matters concerning cultivation and consumption of GMO raises novel and complex issues of general public importance; however this matter addresses well established principles of constitutional interpretation,” Mwangi’s lawyer argued.

Public participation

Justice Thande heard that the case affects the general public in terms of public participation. “We are of the view that courts have clearly laid out what constitutes the right to public participation. It cannot be said this matter raises a substantial question of law,” she argued. The AG filed the application for empanelment of an expanded bench saying the issues raised by the petitioners Mwangi and Kenyan peasants League were weighty.

The petitioners are opposed to the importation, cultivation and consumption of GMOs on grounds that the decision to lift the ban was not procedural and it was unlawful.

They also contend that GMO products pose a health risk to Kenyans, particularly the poor and those with low incomes.

Kenyan Peasants League on their part claim that the lifting of the ban and removing regulatory protocols imposed in 2012 is unprocedural and unlawful.