 very, very good morning to you. If you have just joined us, this is why in the morning your favorite breakfast show, of course, on your favorite channel. That is channel Y254. My name is Valentine or at Color Leave Out. No, I was not born on Valentine's Day, but it's about to be that season. So please feel free. Feel free to my tool, mobile money. In fact, if you send me something, I promise you mobile money will never hang again. Ever. And you can put that on something or hashtag all the days at MCM where we crush on our men or the generic hashtag Y in the morning. Now, we just started the intro. If you just joined us halfway through, well, some ways through, not halfway just yet, but with Stephanie Ayeta and of course, Brian Sackler 101. And we have decided that January, we are living it to the fullest. Now, don't tell anyone but Steph's birthday tomorrow. So please prepare yourself. Okay. Anyway, that's neither here nor there. I've got someone very special in a studio. Very, I'm looking for the adjective. I'll give it to you in a bit, but let me allow him to introduce himself. Good morning, sir. Good morning viewers. My name is Chris Ostom, Xavier Harvey. I'm an advocate of the High Court of Kenya and also a council member of the Law Society of Kenya. Poised. That's the word. You're very poised. Yes, he has an air about him. Yes. All right. Tell us a little bit about yourself before we get into the youth and affairs conversation today. Oh, well, I like to say that I'm a very simple, quiet person. Of course, an advocate. I practice here in Nairobi. Generally, commercial law and tax law. And in the Law Society of Kenya, I convene the tax committee. And I'm very proud that in the past two years, we've been able to do, we've been able to advance what we call tax justice in Kenya. And that's why you've been saying things like, you know, the petition to stop the finance bill and other interventions we are making with the Kenya Revenue Authority in order to make sure that our taxes are or the taxes that Kenyans pay are, you know, are reasonable taxes. Yes. Okay. I want to touch on that tax situation before we draw the map and figure out why it feels like there's a certain struggle between the executive and the judiciary, whether it's supposed to be arms of the same government. But I'd like to believe when we look at other countries or let's say other, we are a third world quote unquote, unfortunately. But so we look at second world and first world countries. Yes, their taxes are quite, I don't want to say on the high side, but you can feel that the taxes in your general day to day movements, right? But you look at the place like the States, they have unemployment. So if you're not employed, you go receive a check every month, you know, there is free education in places like Sweden and them. So how, why isn't that translating to us? Why are just the taxes high? Why are we not feeling the benefits? Well, unfortunately, in Kenya, we have a scourge called corruption. You just went into it. Yes. We have a scourge called corruption. And that really messes up the way we collect taxes and taxes which are supposed to be for the benefit of Kenyans. We have many, many loans, which the country, the government is currently servicing. But you know, the question that always revolves around the mind of us of an ordinary Kenyan is where does this money go? Where does this money go? And it really starts from the budgeting process where we are budgeting for corruption. We are budgeting for inflated prices. And that's really why even when you drive around Nairobi, you get port holes. When the governor is speaking about mitigating against floods, we do not see that kind of mitigation taking place. And it's really, really unfortunate because this is taxpayers, this is tax that Kenyans pay. And I would say about 40 to 60% of the money that Kenyans usually make go into taxes. The other 40% goes into loans and things for personal development, rent and so on and so forth. So Kenyans remain with very little for them to, you know, even grow themselves. Very, very unfortunate situation, but it's really caused from corruption. And what I'd want to encourage, encourage the government to do and other stakeholders like the Law Society of Kenya and the private sector to do is really to educate people about what corruption really is, what it means. When you educate people, Kenyans, right from primary school, secondary school, university, continuous professional development about what corruption really is, they get to understand what it does, all forms of corruption, and then they get to shun it. That's the only way, in my personal opinion, the kind of tax that we are paying right now is going to be able to make sense. It's good that the government is paying, is making efforts towards paying loans that were taken, but it needs to balance. There needs to be a kind of policy where there is a balance between the payment of the loans and money injected back into the economy for growth. Yes. Is it arguable that the ideal capitalistic model is things trickle down? Yes? So is it something that we can say that there are people who are at, quote, animal farm because his excellence he actually did at one point. He has so many appearances in the media. It's kind of confusing, but he did say something about animal farm. And if you read the book, it alludes to some, all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others. So that's where you have a situation where the rich are increasing and while the rest are either remaining where they are or kind of being left out in the development process. Is that what's going on? Yeah, certainly. Certainly it is because you see the kind of the kind of education that corruption in Kenya has taught us, especially within the last 20 years, is that the most corrupt people and the big corruption actually involves the rich. And you get the rich doing very big kinds of corruption, which the middle class do not do. They do the middle class do the middle kind of corruption and they want to go up to the top. And then you get the the ordinary Moananchi, the lower class people doing the lower class kind of corruption. Let me tell you, let me tell you an example of corruption. A Matatu driver. We have roads in Kenya, traffic laws in Kenya, and they say that someone is not supposed to overlap, but you get this person overlapping and right at the corner there, you find a police officer who might also be at the lower, maybe lower middle class, lower cadre in the society who takes a bribe of 50 shillings because this Matatu driver has overlapped. You see, that is, and I think I'm going to say a lot about corruption because it's a scourge. And unless we are very serious about fighting it, very serious about fighting it by first educating ourselves what in our daily lives corruption actually means, we are never going to end it. And it will just be the animal farm day in, day out, and nothing is ever there. The more things change, the more they'll remain the same. Yeah. And I'm sorry. But let me say something about the current government. The current government, when it was campaigning, they said that they are going to get rid of corruption. They said that they are going to uphold the rule of law. They are going to respect court orders. And I remember there is a time that the Law Society of Kenya seemed to be the only institution in Kenya which was challenging the government because we did not have, so to speak, an official opposition. So we were talking against the excesses of the previous regime. And the current regime was supporting us in doing that. But what we are seeing right now is the current regime getting frustrated because of their own actions of flouting the constitution, refusing to follow the law. We justifiably take matters to court and they are stopped or they are injuncted and they get frustrated. Why are you getting frustrated? The only thing that the Law Society of Kenya is seeing is that follow the law. All right. Okay. So now one of the things that I believe affected me properly and in a correct manner when I was in school is when they were teaching us about the three arms of the government. So let me please educate you small. It's not going to be a very, very long speech or monologue, but I will break it down for you so you understand why we are trying to pick this apart and see if there is indeed one arm fighting with the other or if it's just friction or what indeed is going on. That's why we are here today. So we have the executive that includes the president, deputy president, and the cabinet. So the president here is the head of state, government, and commander in chief of the Kenya Defense Force, the chairperson of the National Security Council. Then we have the legislature, that is the National Assembly and the Senate. That is the legislature. It has a couple of members. 290 members elected, 47 women representatives, 12 members nominated, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. Then we have the judiciary. So this is divided into the superior courts and subordinate courts. So the superior courts include Supreme Court Court of Appeal and the High Court, which is the highest being the Supreme Court. The subordinate courts are the magistrates, caddy courts, court, marshal, and a tribe, be you knows. All right. So now fast forward, this Friday or the past Friday, rather, we had, we saw a picketing of members of the law set of Kenya, that is LSK. So why would you explain that to someone who doesn't really understand what's going on right now before we draw the map? Okay. First of all, the Law Society of Kenya is a statutory body. It is a body or an institution which is formed, so to speak, by the law. And we have a mandate given to us by the law to uphold and respect the rule of law, to uphold, promote the rule of law and constitutionalism. What you just from saying right now, there is a separation between the functions of the executive, the legislature, and the judiciary. There are certain utterances that the head of state meet, honorable Ruto. And those utterances appeared to be as if he was encroaching and casting aspersions on the character of the judges we have and also suggesting, and I use the word suggesting very deliberately, suggesting that he is not going to respect the decisions of the court. Now, that is very, very unfortunate by a person who ought to know better the head of state. He knows that these three arms of government, they work collaboratively, but they are separate. And what usually happens is that they are supposed to be checks, checks and balances. I have a mandate to make laws, but the judiciary will tell parliament that yes, you have a mandate to make laws, but you cannot make unconstitutional laws. We will allow you to make laws, but please don't make unconstitutional laws. The executive, through the president, has a mandate of creating policy, implementing laws, implementing policy. But they do not have a mandate of telling the legislature that this is the way you're supposed to make these laws or telling the judiciary that this is the way you're supposed to decide these cases. And now we are seeing a trend where the legislature, the executive seems to be making certain suggestions. And this is really because it appears that it is the judiciary which has refused to budge. It's refused to say that, fine, the executive has certain policies. Very good policies, if you ask me. Like, you know, affordable housing. Very good policy. But how is it being implemented? Is the implementation of this policy going to affect the rights and freedoms of ordinary Kenyans across the boat? That's what the court was actually saying. You cannot make a policy that discriminates between people who are employed and people who are not employed. So what the Law Society of Kenya did is to take that legislation, policy now transformed into legislation and challenge that at the judiciary and the judiciary made its determination. Now, when the judiciary made its determination, the executive and parliament, the executive and parliament challenged that decision at the court of appeal. They should wait for a decision to be made, an independent decision to be made by the courts. So that once a decision is made one way or another, they are supposed to follow it. What we see happening is the head of state sort of, the word is sort of threatening. Let me use that word. Okay. Threatening the judges that if you guys don't make a decision in accordance with the policies we want to implement, that is completely unacceptable. We as advocates do not advocate, we do not, we are not going to condone that because when ordinary citizens, that Matatu driver comes to me and tells me that this person, that I was driving and this person in a VX came and hit me and he was the one who was driving on the wrong side. He comes to me as an advocate so that I can take that matter to court and the court can decide on who was wrong. He does not expect that the VX driver is going to stand and tell the judge, you know, if you rule against me, things are going to be bad for you. That's totally unacceptable. It muddies the profession, the profession that we practice, the oath that we take to say the truth and to uphold the rule of law and I like something that the head of state on Roboruto used to say when he was campaigning and he said he's going to uphold the rule of law. Let him not go back on his word, let him continue in a trend that, you know, instills confidence in the general public, in the international community that he is going to respect our constitution and the rule of law. Yes. I think this is a perfect time to set a disclaimer. One of my favorite things about this particular topic is the law is the law and the constitution is available for public consumption. However, anything that stems from this conversation that is any sentiments or innuendos does not reflect those of the station. However, the constitution, like I said, is very, very accessible to the public and to, okay, to you as the public. Let me say it like that. All right, so I want us to draw a map. Yes. The High Court in 2023 found the housing levy illegal. Yes. And it stated that it was discriminatory, as you've just said, maybe as it targets those in formal employment versus informal. Yeah. So a bench of three judges suspended the decision until January of this year, the 10th. We are currently on the 15th. So is the president, is it getting a bit skirmish or uncomfortable because we haven't heard anything from the said court? Or what do you think this upwards about? Why did he come out and claim perhaps or point a finger and said perhaps maybe the opposition has something to do with this and they are in fact curbing development in the country despite his best efforts to make the country a better place to live in? Okay. 10 days, 15 days. My personal opinion is and what appears to be out there, commentary from the newspapers and so on and so forth suggests that the executive and parliament are working on a bill that is going to address the issues that were identified in the High Court judgment. So I think perhaps new legislation is going to be brought in respect of the housing living. But again, we need to understand that there is an appeal that has been filed in the Court of Appeal and that appeal is yet to be determined. And this is by the government? Yeah, this is by the government and also an appendage by the legislature because the legislature seems to be supporting because it's their legislation. They seem to be supporting this particular piece of legislation. Like I said earlier, it is important for these two arms of government to respect what is going to be the outcome of that process, that appeal process. It's good that they are coming up or formulating another piece of legislation, which is going to address the shortcomings of the previous legislation. We're going to have a look at that. The Law Society of Kenya is going to have a critical look at that. And we want to assure the public that if there is any if there is any width of unconstitutionality. With just general justice. If there is any unconstitutionality in that piece of legislation, we are going to challenge it. We are going to challenge it. We do not. We are here to protect the interest of the public. And the public are our clients. And we are not afraid. There is a comment that was made yesterday by one of the senators that he is not that they are going to ensure that government friendly people are elected to the Law Society of Kenya. But I would want to say to the senator that the Law Society of Kenya is not the council of the Law Society of Kenya. It's all members. And all members actually make these decisions through the general through the general meeting. And Law Society of Kenya members as advocates are the ones who are going to stand up and say that is wrong. That is unconstitutional. And we are not going to be afraid of doing that. Yes. All right. So we had or we saw his Excellency the president coming out and expressing me. I want to say this Dane. I don't know if it's too harsh, but he did express something publicly in front of the media and the public, the general public. And then a few days later he seemed to retract it or come a bit softer. Maybe he felt or the uproar was a bit too much. And then he kind of, you know, I'm joking kind of that kind of that vibe, you know, then we have his Excellency the deputy president coming in and saying now he's going to file a petition on Thursday the 18th of January. That is Thursday this week against the judge who if you remember at the time of debate, his funds were frozen. Yes, totaling up to I think approximately 200 and something in the million in the million range. So what's going on? What do you think that that says and then also you during the picketing on Friday, we had his Honorable Carlonzo Musioka coming in with full regalia. Is that statement being made? What is the lines to read in between here? Okay. I think I've had three questions from you. Yes. Sorry. Excited. Yeah. The first question with regard to the president, Honorable Ruto, he says something one time and he seems to retract it. And I sort of laughed when I saw that because I wondered, was he trying to test the waters to see what is going to happen? And very, very interesting. And what I'd want to remind Kenyans is, and everybody really, is that Honorable Ruto is a politician, very, very good politician by the way. But like I said earlier, he is also the president of this country. This country has a constitution and he ought to know better. There are certain things. I don't know whether he was excited. I don't know whether he was just saying it for jokes. But he ought to know better that certain things that he says are taken very, very, very seriously. And the Law Society of Kenya took it seriously, very seriously. And that's why we had the picketing. And just to also answer the third question with that is, when you see Kalonzo Musioka coming and joining the picketing, when you see others like the former minister, the former minister, Eugene Wamalua joining in, senior council joining in, all these advocates who are very, very respected and they know they're oath of office. I would not want to look at it as a political gimmick that they were dressed in, at least Kalonzo Musioka was dressed in legal regalia and coming to join in the protests. I think he was just supporting the position of the Law Society of Kenya in terms of protecting and upholding the rule of law. And it's quite commendable that he did. It doesn't mean that just because he's a member of the opposition or these people are members of the opposition, they were trying to make a statement. If they were making their own statement, that's them. But what we were doing on Friday was to tell every Kenyan, including the president, that everybody in this country is going to respect the constitution and the law. That's why we were picketing. That's why we actually got police escort, because now we see that the police are respect the fact that the laws in which they are supposed to enforce ought to be respected. In terms of what the deputy president, his excellency, Mr. Gashago, is saying, said yesterday or the day before, I think that's a very good thing. It appears as if he has some sort of evidence regarding the judge. And it appears as if he has gathered that evidence and he wants to present it to the Judicial Service Commission on Thursday. That is very good. That is procedure. That is in keeping with what the constitution says about the removal of a judge in office and the process in which that particular removal is supposed to take place. So if he has the evidence, let him bring it. And I hope this is not, what do we usually call it, he's not bluffing or he's not just saying it for the sake of politics. One of the things that I always say in our fraternity is professionalism, not politics. So I hope that if he has evidence, he's going to use the correct channels provided under the constitution to bring a petition for the removal of that judge if there is evidence. Now what usually happens in that particular process is that the Judicial Service Commission will look at the petition and the evidence that has been presented and see whether there is something that merits a recommendation to the president for the establishment of a tribunal to remove the judge. And that is a process in itself. But one thing that I would also like to say is this. Judges everywhere in the world have something probably not everywhere. You'd probably not have this in dictatorial countries. And Kenya is not a dictatorial country. But judges in Kenya and in all constitutional democracies enjoy something called decisional independence. They are free to make certain decisions in for as long as those decisions are based on their understanding of the law. Now it's a very technical subject. I won't really get into it right now. But I hope that having listened to what the deputy president said, I hope that his petition is not just confined to the decision that was made by the good judge, but also some kind of conduct, some kind of some kind of, you know, let me just use the word conduct, which this particular judge made against him. Yes. Just before we close on that, I'd like to just shine light on the timeliness of his filing the petition. Is it because his excellency, the president said something, or are the wheels of justice painfully slow? What's going on? I don't think I do not want to say that it's it is a matter of timing because we need to acknowledge and the chief justice, because I've spoken a lot about parliament and the executive, but our chief justice needs to acknowledge that there are certain bad apples within the judiciary and not only judges and magistrates, but also judicial staff who are promoting a kind, a culture of impunity and corruption. These are allegations or these are things that we can say honestly and with conviction that they are true. Well, there are some allegations and I know most of the people, most of the advocates who practice with me in courts know that these are things that usually happen. Okay. And it is very, very important, you know, Valentine, whether it's smoke, there's usually fire. Yes. And I think that it is time for the chief justice to introspect and ask herself, why are these allegations being made against the judiciary? Is there something that is amiss or is it that we are just a soft target for politicians and other people to, you know, to, are we a soft target? So where they smoke this fire? And I would say personally that there are, I have had allegations of corruption within the judiciary. And if these allegations are there, I think it is very, very important for the chief justice to tell, to rally her people in the judiciary and tell them that we are not going to condone any forms of corruption, right from the head, which was the chief justice to principal judges, to heads of stations. Everybody should say no to cases of impunity and corruption. So that whenever we are talking about the judiciary, the judiciary is so clean that everybody has confidence in going to the judiciary. You spoke about, you spoke about the wheels of justice grinding very slowly. That is also something which needs to be addressed within the judiciary. Why is it taking, and I think last week there was an issue of the case where the young boy had killed his entire family, why it had taken too long for that hearing, for that trial to begin. You know, these are things that the chief justice needs to consider and the relevant persons need to be called into a meeting and asked what is happening here. And not only the judiciary, by the way, also the investigating agencies, the prosecuting agency, the DPP, the DCI, the police, all need to have a conversation as to how these cases, you know, justice needs to be dispensed fairly quickly, so that we have a judiciary or a justice system that seems to be, you know, grinding, you know, fairly fast, so that, you know, there's that, there's usually this maxim, but it's not a maxim or it's a proverb or a saying that, you know, justice delayed is justice denied. So those things need to be addressed. Okay. Yes. All right, so I really don't want to finish this conversation, but in the interest of time, I will ask you one last one, maybe in parts. So we are about to see the elections for the law study, that is, three weeks give or take? Six weeks. Oh, six weeks. Really give, give those three weeks, another three weeks, thanks. So in six weeks, you guys are going to have elections. And I understand that this is something that will be under a lot of scrutiny, especially by politicians, you know, because now there's all this, I want friction, it's kind of harsh, but it is the reality. So what does that mean for the elections in general? And what do elections really entail? It must be a sight to see, to see lawyers debate. It must be cool. Very, very cool, by the way. If you'll be having a debate, I should be inviting you. Oh, you should. I should. Really should. Very, what does it mean? In terms of politicians in the country, it means nothing. It means nothing. I'd like to say this. Law Society of Kenya is one of the most independent organizations in this country. Such pride. Yes, yes, yes, yes. Very, very independent individuals. We manage our own things. Even politicians who are politicians who are lawyers. Senator Chirarge is a lawyer. I don't want to assume that what he was saying yesterday or the day before he was convicted of it. We have a very, very independent institution. And I will tell you that if lawyers themselves feel or perceive as if they are sort of being captured by either the legislature, executive, or even the judiciary, members of the Law Society of Kenya are going to reject a certain candidate. We are a totally independent. And we thrive in that. We thrive in that because we understand that our work really is to protect the interests of the public who come for justice. And justice to one person is not justice to the other person. That's right. It's construed a little bit different. It cuts across. And it's what the courts usually say that this now I've done some justice, but if you're not happy with it, you appeal, you appeal. And if you lose, I mean you accept. But the executive and the legislature work a little bit differently because the legislature is supposed to work more independently because they're supposed to make laws that cut across. But a little bit differently because there are certain interests that they are trying to propagate to advance like the housing levy. You're trying to advance that interest and you would advance it by all means. You're trying to make legislation and you think that this legislation is good legislation. You've debated it in the flow of the house. So you sort of want to advance it. But it's only the courts which will come in and say no, no, no, no. We think that in our own interpretation, we think this is wrong. This is wrong. And who take these things to the courts? It's us lawyers. And one side will be arguing for and the other side will be arguing against. And next time I would be arguing against and somebody else would be arguing for. And that's why it's very, very important to us as a fraternity for our representatives, not really leaders, but there's people who speak for us are very independent minded. What I usually call intellectual independence. You don't just accept what you're being told because that is what you've been being told. So in terms of the in terms of the election, I think it's going to be a free and fair election. I don't think that we are going to be infiltrated by people who want to work for the government. And after all, there are 13 representatives who are going to be in the council. So all of them cannot think they see. And some of them, and most of them are going to check each other. I think that's the way as a council in the past two years, that's the way we've worked. And I think we've done a stellar job. Yes, yes. All right. Okay. He's answered on every base. Just as you were speaking, it just came to my mind that I'm really curious about something. And maybe this is something that will benefit the viewer. And I promise this is my last question, guys, although this conversation might continue after we finish, because, you know, I like to know things. So I want to say I want to put you in a scenario where someone has maybe a petty misdemeanor. Yes. And and whether they're in holding or not, or they're out in a bond or bail, so they're supposed to be heard in court. And then let's say someone else who is in family court, and you know, literally the wheels of justice move really, really slowly. So you can find someone who's been in court for even 14 years and up, yeah. But then you have something that happens in the country, you know, that affects the nation. Let's say elections, you're taking the some what like we had actually the previous elections, how they went to court. Are politicians or our astute people, do they get their cases expedited at the expense of the normal person in court? Yes and no. And that's why I think I spoke about corruption in the beginning. Really circling back all the way. Corruption is, I think, I think we talk about corruption, but we really don't understand what it is. You see, when a politician brings their case, and this is, you know, probably done by done through the judiciary, brings that case and it's expedited. And a petty offender, you know, stole, stole maize or chicken. And that person is in the justice system for more than six months, I would say. It's really, really sad. And this is something and it happens. I'm not going to sit here and tell you that it doesn't happen. I am a truthful person. It happens. We need to find a way of reading ourselves of this vice, of, you know, trying to steal a match, trying to, you know, get some kind of an advantage. Because we need to look at things as if all of us are equal, whether we have a little bit more money than another person. Avoid that temptation of removing some money from your pocket, so that your things can be done faster, and let that person who sits in that office actually demand from that person who sits from that office that I need service. Let me give you an example. If you live in the village, what is the benefit of you going to KPLC, for example, and this is just an example, by way of analogy, going to KPLC and giving them, they are supposed to electrify the entire line, but then you go and give, because you have the money, going to give them 30,000 Bob for them to pull electricity power to your house when your neighbors do not have power, doesn't make any sense, because you're going to be driving through darkness in order for you to get to your house. If there is insecurity, for example, you're still going to be affected. In fact, you create or you amass attention towards yourself. So this thing in the judiciary of the wheels of justice grinding slowly, and others fairly faster, it needs to stop. And I would tell this to the Chief Justice when I meet with her, she needs to address it very, very seriously, and she needs to be very firm about it. I know she's a good person. I know she is, she deserves the position she is currently holding, very good judge, but she needs to address those aspasions, those allegations, those incidences that are actually given the judiciary a bad name. And that should be her legacy. I think that should be her legacy. Okay. So in a sentence, what would you like your legacy to be? See, let us hope that, you know, all goes well during the elections this particular season. What would you want your legacy to be? If I am not reelected, which I think I will be reelected, I'd like my members, our members to remember me as a person who represented progress. When we were sitting in council, I think I lived up to the agenda that I had put across, and I always advised the president of the society correctly, truthfully. I always stood for professionalism, things, member services to be given to members professionally, efficiently, effectively. Phone calls to be picked up. You know, if it's the branches, what are we doing with our branches? Let us take some activities at the national level to the branches so that they feel the presence of the society. Let us listen to what the branches of the law society are saying, because it is in the branches that we get to understand the specific issues that our members are going through at that branch level. So I think I represent progress. I think the law society of Kenya has come out very, very strongly as a champion of constitutionalism and the rule of law, and my members would understand that that alone represents welfare of the society, the welfare of advocates. In fact, lawyers don't need any other kind of welfare. As long as people, ordinary Moananchi, understand that these are the people who champion for the rule of law, for constitutionalism, for people to follow the laid-down procedures and so on and so forth. People will always be coming to lawyers when they have problems. All right, thank you. I did ask for a sentence, but it was a very, very well packaged, so that's fine. Oh, thank you. I'm sorry about that. It's okay. It's okay. The more I know the better. The more we know the better. All right. Thank you so very much for having this conversation with me. It's very riveting. Yes, I wish you all the best, and I still am going to hold you on to that invitation that you promised me. You guys saw it, right? Yes. Honestly, I don't think I'd be a lawyer. It was one of my dreams at one point in this education system, but thank you once again. Thank you very much. All right, so we're going to conclude it, but we still have so much more for you. So, Brand Saka 101 is about to come through with a conversation with, let me not even spill the beans. Just go to our socials at Y-Five on Facebook, Y-Five 4 channel on X, Y-Five 4 underscore channel on the Gram, and of course, all those other wonderful platforms that entail social media. So, from me to you, I'll see you when I see you, but we're not done with you yet, so don't go away.