Judge wants court to reverse her sacking

A judge who was appointed after the promulgation of the Constitution wants the court to reverse a decision by a vetting panel to have her sacked.

Grace Nzioka argued the Judges and Magistrates Vetting Board had acted outside its mandate by purporting to remove her from office whereas she had been appointed as a judge after promulgation of the Constitution.

She submitted she had been appointed as a judge on September 2, 2011 after undergoing a competitive vetting exercise, which had public participation. Ms Nzioka said she had been cleared of any wrongdoing or impropriety and sworn into office.

"There was a jurisdictional error in the vetting of the judge by the vetting board, who wrongfully assumed powers to vet and purported to remove her from office where the board had no powers under the Constitution," she submitted through her lawyer Alfred Nyandieka.

Nyandieka submitted that the decision by the board to vet Nzioka in her previous position as a magistrate and going ahead to find her unsuitable was unreasonable.
"The action and determination by the board to find the judge unsuitable to continue serving is illogical, outrageous and one that cannot be taken by a reasonable tribunal directing itself on the provision of the Constitution," argued Nyandieka.

However, in its response, the vetting board in a sworn affidavit by chief executive officer Reuben Chirchir argued it had acted within its mandate. Mr Chirchir argued that at the time of the promulgation of the Constitution, the judge was still serving as a magistrate and that is why the board vetted her as a magistrate and not a judge.

She is also seeking to have the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) compelled by the court to allocate her a court and a station until the matter is heard and determined.

Nzioka, who was a senior principal magistrate, argued that JSC had neither deployed nor assigned her a station in the recent reorganisation.