The Supreme Court will have the final word on a case challenging the constitutionality of the Constituency Development Fund (CDF).
The case was filed by The Institute for Social Accountability (TISA) and the Centre for Enhancing Democracy and Good Governance (CEDGG), which argue that CDF is unconstitutional as it gives Members of Parliament (MPs) an avenue to implement projects funded by the public, which constitutionally is the mandate of the Executive.
Their application reads in part: “The judgment and orders of the Court of Appeal…dated 24th November 2017 be overturned save for the declaration that Sections 24(3)(c) and (f) and 37(1) (a) of the Constituencies Development Fund Act, 2013 violates the principle of separation of powers.”
The Court of Appeal last month overturned a 2015 High Court ruling that declared CDF unconstitutional in its entirety.
The Appeals Court, however, ruled against legislators' participation in decision-making or deployment of staff to manage the funds disbursed by Treasury every year.
[caption caption="Inside the National Assembly"]
[/caption]
The CDF kitty has since been renamed National Government Constituency Development Fund (NGCDF) as MPs battle to keep a hold on the funds.
Those behind the Supreme Court case argue that CDF has essentially created an unchecked third tier of devolution.
The 2015 High Court ruling found that the Constitution had been violated when the Senate was not involved in the amendment of the CDF Act in 2013.
The High Court judges gave lawmakers 12 months to correct the laws.
The Court of Appeal, however, declared that it was improbable that CDF would affect operations of the County Governments but noted that the involvement of MPs in managing the funds was contrary to the principle of Separation of Powers.
[caption caption="Supreme Court justices"]
[/caption]
