LSK: CJ Mutunga meddling with vetting of judges

The Law Society of Kenya (LSK) on Sunday claimed that Chief Justice Willy Mutunga is interfering with the review by the Judges Vetting Board on the suitability of Justice Mohammed Ibrahim to serve in the judiciary. Read (Vetting board issues verdict on four judges)

LSK accused Dr Mutunga of writing to the board informing them that Justice Mohammed Ibrahim had delivered all the pending cases that it (board) initially based on to send him home.

LSK chairman Eric Mutua told reporters in Nairobi that his organisation was copied into a letter dated September 4th, in which CJ Mutunga “thanked” Judge Ibrahim for completing the pending cases within a short time.

The letter is said to have been sent to the Judges and Magistrates Vetting Board and copied to Justice Ibrahim.

But Mr Mutua read conspiracy in the move, saying it shouldn’t have come at a time the judge had appealed to the board to reconsider their ruling in July.

“We suspect that the reason why these 264 rulings were written within three months, some of which were pending for eight years, is to influence the decision of the board on the review of the suitability determination,” he said.

On July 20, the board declared Supreme Court Judge Ibrahim unfit to serve in the judiciary.

In reaching its decision, the board led by Mr Sharad Rao said the judge had delayed cases before him, some running since 2004.

Further, the board ruled that the judge could not remember the number of judgements and rulings still pending before his desk, while serving in the High Court.

“The delays were unacceptable, carried like a hump on a camel’s back from one posting to the next. Hundreds of litigants from every walk of life felt robbed of their right to have their cases finally determined,” read part of the decision.

“The judge might have heard them with empathy, but he failed to deliver with celerity. The damage done to public confidence in the Judiciary was indubitable, extensive and irremediable, the board observed in its verdict.

The Judge later appealed the decision but the LSK reads malice in the manner and pace in which the cases have been dispensed with.

“Some of those decisions look like they were written in a hurry and do not take in consideration of all the arguments made in court. Since they were written after the same judge was declared unsuitable, there is no legal authority for the validity of those decisions.”

Contacted, the CJ’s office refused to be drawn in the accusations saying they would not comment on a matter pending before the board.

“The Justice Ibrahim case like other similar matters is outside the territory of the judiciary because it is active before the Judges and Magistrates Vetting Board,” Mr Naim Bilal, the Judiciary Spokesman told Nation.

“We prefer that all matters in this regard be dealt with the same way,” he added.

At the same time, LSK expressed concern in the delays by the government to amend the laws and allow the Vetting Board to continue sieving the credibility of judges and magistrates.

In July, the government successfully lobbied Parliament to pass the Miscellaneous Amendment Bill 2012, to give vetting powers to the Judicial Service Commission, away from the Board to continue checking the character of magistrates.

But later, both the CJ and the Attorney-General admitted that the amendment had been ill advised. They promised to re-amend the law and give back those powers to the board.

On Sunday, Mr Mutua said the Commission could delay the vetting which had already been started by the Board.