LSK wants ruling on disgraced judges stayed

By Isaiah Lucheli

The Law Society of Kenya (LSK) wants a five-judge Bench, which barred the President from de-gazetting four judges to stay their verdict.

In an application filed at the High Court, LSK through lawyer Charles Kanjama, is seeking a stay of the orders issued by the court to enable them proceed to the Court of Appeal to contest the decision.

He said the order that was issued by the court should not take effect, noting the cases filed at the High Court could take long, defeating the work of the vetting board.

Judges Jonathan Havelock, Eric Ogola, Pauline Nyamweya, Alfred Mabeya, and Joseph Mutava last week restrained the President from degazetting three Court of Appeal judges and a High Court judge.

The Bench further ruled that the High Court had jurisdiction to hear cases filed against the board and review verdicts arrived at by it if they infringed the fundamental rights of the petitioners or contravened the law.

While supporting the application by the LSK, lawyer Ekuru Aukot representing the board submitted that the verdict by the board offended the Constitution and likened it to amending the Constitution through the back door.

“The verdict by the Bench has questioned the supremacy of the Constitution. The decision by the court offends the Constitution and the board has an arguable appeal at the court of Appeal,” said Aukot.

However, lawyers opposed to the application attacked the LSK, terming it a busy body, adding the society was an interested party but was filing applications, which in an ideal situation should have been filed by Judicial Service Commission, the Board or the Attorney General.

Lawyers representing the petitioners including Paul Gicheru submitted that LSK had failed to meet the three legal principles for staying of proceedings in court.

“The three principles include making the application without due delay, should provide security and should indicate the loss that one will suffer if the stay is not effected. LSK is an interested party and has failed to indicate to the court the loss it will suffer,” said Gicheru.

Lawyer Fred Ojiambo also opposed the application for stay, saying that the right to be heard fairly and expeditiously was enshrined in the Constitution and noted that this would be denied if the application was granted.

“The right to be heard fairly and expeditiously as enshrined in the Constitution will be denied if the stay order is given at the altar of allegation by a person who does not have a right,” said Ojiambo.

The ruling will be made on November 7.