Confusion over Supreme Court ruling on criminal appeals

A picture showing Supreme Court judges. They ruled that High Court Judges assigned to special divisions cannot handle criminal cases. PHOTO | EVANS HABIL | NATION MEDIA GROUP

What you need to know:

  • Some of the judgments were delivered by two-Judge bench, some from the Environment and Lands Court, and Employment and Labour Relations Court.
  • Dr Mutunga exceeded his administrative jurisdiction when he purported to allow Judges.

A state of confusion has engulfed more than 500 people, who had filed criminal appeals three years ago after the Supreme Court declared that High Court judges assigned to special divisions cannot handle criminal cases.

Many of the cases, which commenced under the tenure of retired Chief Justice Willy Mutunga, had already been determined but the decision by the highest court in the land will result into some of them being reopened, and heard afresh.

Some of the judgments were delivered by two-judge bench, some from the Environment and Lands Court (ELC), and Employment and Labour Relations Court (ELRC).

They were appointed by retired Chief Justice to handle more than 2,000 criminal appeals in 2013 as part of an effort to reduce backlog and also decongest prison.

However, a full bench of the Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice David Maraga on Friday ruled that the mixed benches were unlawfully constituted since some of the judges had been appointed and took their oath of office to work in special divisions of the High Court.

HEARD AFRESH

“Despite the drawback our decision will have on the backlog of cases in our courts, we have no choice but to agree to the plea by the three convicts that their appeals at the High Court level be heard afresh,” ruled a seven-judge bench of the Supreme Court.

The decision, they said, will have similar effect on all the appeals that were determined by similar High Court benches.

They held that all High Court Judges enjoyed equal power to adjudicate on matters filed before them but their status and assignments were limited to their specific terms of employment, spelt out by their employer, the Judicial Service Commission.

The highest court found that Dr Mutunga exceeded his administrative jurisdiction when he purported to allow Judges who had been specifically hired to work in the ELC and ELRC to determine criminal appeals.

In 2013, Justice Mutunga had through a legal notice published on October 4, 2013 allowed judges from the ELC as well as the ELRC, to handle Criminal Appeals cases countrywide. They were handling the cases during Criminal Appeals Service Week.