In a surprising turn of events surrounding the ongoing constitutional petition filed by Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua, questions are being raised about the legitimacy of a recent judicial maneuver by a three-judge bench.
The bench comprising Lady Justice Frida Mugambi, Justice Eric Ogolla, and Justice Anthony Mrima was initially constituted to handle six specific cases, including Nairobi High Court Petition No. 522 of 2024.
However, it unexpectedly took on Nairobi High Court Petition No. E565 of 2024 and Kerugoya High Court Petition No. E015 of 2024, which were not part of their official docket. This development has sparked concerns over the adherence to proper judicial protocol.
Compounding the issue, the same bench previously stated it had no availability for hearings until October 29, 2024.
Remarkably, on Saturday, October 19, 2024, it ( the bench) convened to set a hearing date for October 22, thereby advancing the timeline from a previously scheduled mention of October 24, 2024.
Observers are questioning how the judges could adjust their schedules to accommodate these cases, given their earlier commitments.
Legal representatives for Gachagua are demanding clarity from CJ Martha Koome on the procedural irregularities, particularly concerning the transfer of his petition file from Justice Chacha Mwita to the three-judge bench.
”The reason for our demand above is that on Saturday, 19th October 2024, an application was filed and though we were not notified about the bench being constituted, we have now been served with orders issued by a three-judge bench. To the best of our knowledge, this bench constituting of Justice Ogola, Justice Mrima and Lady Justice Mugambi had only been constituted to hear other petitions consolidated under Nairobi High Court Petition No. 522 of 2024 and not the instant Petition.”
After filing Petition No. E565 on October 18, 2024, Justice Mwita issued a conservatory order staying the implementation of Gachagua’s impeachment by the Senate, directing that the matter be mentioned before a new bench on October 24.
The sudden urgency displayed by the bench in moving up the hearing date raises suspicions of potential bias and political interference. Notably, political figures, including MP Oscar Sudi, have hinted at the expedited swearing-in of a successor to Gachagua, adding further layers of concern.
As the situation unfolds, calls for an investigation into the judicial processes and possible consolidation of cases are gaining momentum.
The legal team representing Gachagua is poised to file a formal complaint with the Judicial Service Commission, emphasizing the need for transparency and fairness in the administration of justice amid growing apprehension over political motivations influencing the judiciary.
