Do we have to completely do away with the one and wholly adopt the other? Isn’t it worth considering what’s good in both the old 8-4-4 and the new CBC as well as what may present challenges implementing, and then working out a compromise? The antagonistic stances the proponents and opponents hold suggest that CBC and 8-4-4 are mutually exclusive. That CBC can only be achieved within a 2-6-3-3-3 curriculum. This is fallacious.
The Supreme Court’s verdict nullifying the BBI process is another landmark ruling, hot on the heels of others that have spoken to power in the past decade. The judgement and its near consistence with rulings on the issue at the High Court of Kenya and the Court of Appeal of Kenya bolsters Kenyans’ confidence in the country’s judiciary. Ever since the reforms that came with the constitution of Kenya 2010, the judiciary has set itself apart as a fair player among the three arms of government. Nowhere has the separation of powers been more potent and meaningful than in the interaction between the judiciary and the executive. Even against the odds of reduced budgetary allocations and threats from the president himself, the judiciary has stood tall and rebuffed every attempt at encroaching on its constitutional mandate.
Wasn’t it Uhuru Kenyatta that framed Raila Odinga as a power-hungry monster who was behind his and William Ruto’s woes at the International Criminal Court (ICC) in 2012/2013? Didn’t he angrily brand the former premier a Kîmûdû and use a host of other unmentionable diatribes on him? Wasn’t he the one that promised a twenty-year reign of Jubilee divided between himself and William Ruto with the words, Wangoje yangu kumi na ya William kumi? Didn’t he mock the opposition with Endeleeni kumeza mate na sisi tuendelee kula nyama? Didn’t he stand side by side with William Ruto as the latter lied through his teeth about the nine stadia?