Of course he is to blame. His job is to anticipate (plan) for new cases as he deals with backlog. If he can come and say parliament or executive didn't support him; that is something else; he knows there are many more cases coming in (as is expected)
I take it you got the earlier point on a simple-minded numbers game. Excellent. On this new one, you are encouraged to look at the differences between the Judiciary's budget requests and what Parliament has allocated. I believe that at the Judiciary's website you will be able to find information on what the Judiciary has wanted to do, what it needed, what it got, etc.
All the candidate interviewed seem to to think they could do more.
Yes, they did. And I would have been surprised if they had done otherwise. But seeming to think and being able to, or doing, are entirely different matters.
Automation for instance has been around for many years - and yet our courts are still rudimentary.
As far as I can tell, none of those interviewed went beyond what Mutunga had already been working on. What exactly did they say that particularly impressed you as new or innovative?
http://www.judiciary.go.ke/portal/blog/post/digitalization-processes-in-the-judiciary-to-involve-usershttp://www.hivisasa.com/kiambu/news/118065http://kenyanewsagency.go.ke/en/judges-to-use-automated-services-in-court/The Judiciary's webpage has numerous pages and reports of what went on during Mutunga's years, his plans, etc. I realize that you generally don't care for facts, but if you wish to engage in a discussion here, them I would encourage you to do a bit of reading.
But you've got Mutunga who think our dressing is rudimentary and we should be wearing kitenge to court. What a damn fool. Judges should wear 15th century headgear as we work on modernize our courts
This might come as news to you, but such things matter. In fact, the people from whom we got these funny outfits (as well as our legal system) think it is so important that judges handling civil and family matters are no longer allowed to wear them---on the grounds that it doesn't help with the public's perception of justice and its accessibility. This was a carefully thought-out and much-discussed matter. On the other hand, here we are, thoughtlessly moving "forward" to the past.
But if I may ask:
Why do you judges in Kenya should wear dead-mzungu wigs, especially 50+ years after independence? The Supreme-Court judges of our former colonizers have ceremonial robes (without funny wigs!) that they wear 2 or 3 times a year; when in session, they wear "regular" clothes, and they have asked lawyers appearing before them to leave their funny outfits at home. (Why?) And yet here we are.
Maraga's return to such silly outfits can be summed in one word:
retrograde. But it is more than just silliness and looking absurd: other than the fact that dress frequently reflects attitude, approach to work an life, etc. ... one should carefully look into why the former colonizers and "advanced" former-colonies have been moving in the other direction.