Tribunal probing judge adjourns after CJ and lawyer fail to turn up

Chairman of Tribunal Investigating judge Joseph Mutava, Judge David Maraga during the hearing of a Tribunal to Investigate judge Mutava at KICC, on 23/05/16. PHOTO: JENIPHER WACHIE

A tribunal investigating the conduct of a suspended judge has adjourned its sittings to give Chief Justice Willy Mutunga and other witnesses time to appear before it.

Dr Mutunga and senior counsel Fred Ngatia were yesterday set to appear before the tribunal investigating Justice Joseph Mutava to testify, but they failed to show up due to their busy schedules.

This prompted appellate judge David Maranga, who chairs the tribunal, to announce the adjournment of the proceedings until June 20, 2016, to give the duo time to appear before the tribunal.

"...but we shall assemble any time before then, subject to the availability of Dr Mutunga and Mr Ngatia," said Justice Maranga.

Earlier, the tribunal lead counsel Nazima Malik told the sitting that the CJ will only be available after the matter at the Supreme Court, where his deputy Kalpana Rawal has disputed the age at which she should retire, is concluded.

Malik informed the tribunal that the case at Supreme Court was proceeding on a daily basis, and added that Ngatia was representing Justice Philip Tunoi in another tribunal.

Albert Nduati, Airtel head of Information Technology, who testified on Wednesday at the tribunal probing Mutava, said a mobile phone line linked to Mutava is registered under the name of Jonathan Bisau, a Kitale resident.

Retired judge Leonard Njagi, who appeared before the team earlier, had told the tribunal that the suspended judge was the owner of the line as the number was saved under his name in his phonebook.

In his testimony, Njagi revealed that while still serving as a judge, he received a text message from Mutava asking him to rule in favour of businesswoman Rose Mbithe in a property suit.

And Mr Nduati, who was expected to continue testifying yesterday, failed to turn-up, with Ms Malik explaining that he had failed to get crucial data from a mobile line that is said to have been used to influence the court case.