Nubian Rights Forum & 2 others v Attorney General & 6 others; Child Welfare Society & 9 others (Interested Parties) [2020] eKLR 542. In its decision in In the Matter of the Speaker of the Senate & another [2013] eKLR, the Supreme Court confirmed this principle when it held that: “It emerges that Kenya’s legislative bodies bear an obligation to discharge their mandate in accordance with the terms of the Constitution, and they cannot plead any internal rule or indeed, any statutory scheme, as a reprieve from that obligation. This Court recognizes the fact that the Constitution vests the legislative authority of the Republic in Parliament. Such authority is derived from the people. This position is embodied in Article 94(1) thereof. The said Article also imposes upon Parliament the duty to protect the Constitution and to promote the democratic governance of the Republic. Article 93(2) provides that the national Assembly and the Senate shall perform their respective functions in accordance with the Constitution. It is therefore clear that while the legislative authority lies with Parliament, the same is to be exercised subject to the dictates of the Constitution. While Parliament is within its general legislative mandate to establish procedures of how it conducts its business, it has always to abide by the prescriptions of the Constitution. It cannot operate besides or outside the four corners of the Constitution. This Court will not question each and every procedural infraction that may occur in either of the Houses of Parliament. The Court cannot supervise the workings of Parliament. The institutional comity between the three arms of government must not be endangered by the unwarranted intrusions into the workings of one arm by another….Where the Constitution decrees a specific procedure to be followed in the enactment of legislation, both Houses of Parliament are bound to follow that procedure. If Parliament violates the procedural requirements of the supreme law of the land, it is for the courts of law, not least the Supreme Court to assert the authority and supremacy of the Constitution.” 543. The Petitioners contend, among other things, that the process of the enactment of the impugned amendments violated the Constitution. It is therefore our sacrosanct duty to determine whether that allegation is true, and if so, provide appropriate remedy. Our fidelity to the Constitution and by extension to the people of Kenya, from whom our mandate emanates, cannot be shaken by isolated reference to the doctrine of separation of powers. The Constitution must be read as a whole. Whereas the Constitution recognizes the doctrine of separation of powers, the same instrument mandates this court to determine whether any action undertaken by Parliament violates the Constitution or the law. That the Constitution should be read as one document finds support in the case of Tinyefuza vs Attorney-General, Const. Pet. No. 1 of 1996 (1997 UGCC3), in which the Ugandan Court of Appeal held that: “[T]he entire Constitution has to be read as an integrated whole and no one particular provision destroying the other but each sustaining the other.” 544. We find no reason to expound further on the jurisdiction of this Court in so far as the enforcement and protection of the Constitution is concerned. Applicable Constitutional Principles 545. It is also useful, before embarking on an analysis of the issues, to set out and bear in mind the principles applicable in a matter challenging the constitutionality of legislation. The starting point is Article 259(1) which obliges this Court to interpret it in a manner that promotes its purposes, values and principles, advances the rule of law and the human rights and fundamental freedoms in the Bill of Rights, permits the development of the law and contributes to good governance. 546. In determining whether an impugned legislation or action is unconstitutional, the provisions of the Constitution must be interpreted purposively in line with Article 259(1) and other principles of constitutional interpretation. In the case of Institute of Social Accountability & Another v National Assembly & 4 Others High Court, [2015] eKLR, the court summed up these principles as follows: http://www.kenyalaw.org - Page 82/174