Judge told to recuse himself from Tatu case

Tatu City Chairman Pius Ngugi (right) with Tatu City Ltd sponsor Stephen Jennings during a press conference at the Sarova Stanley Hotel on February 27, 2015. A businessman in the Sh240 billion Tatu City dispute has asked the presiding judge to recuse himself over allegations of a Sh50 million bribe paid to influence the case. PHOTO | DIANA NGILA | NATION MEDIA GROUP

What you need to know:

  • Mr Christopher Barron told Justice Eric Ogola that a citizen, Mr Wilson Gitonga, made the claims in a letter to the Chief Justice and the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission.
  • On Thursday, other parties agreed to file their responses before the case proceeds.

A businessman in the Sh240 billion Tatu City-dispute has asked the presiding judge to recuse himself over allegations of a Sh50 million bribe paid to influence the case.

Mr Christopher Barron told Justice Eric Ogola that a citizen, Mr Wilson Gitonga, made the claims in a letter to the Chief Justice and the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission.

Mr Barron said there is a likelihood of bias in the case and that his confidence in the judge had been eroded in “light of the serious allegations”. He said he may not get a fair hearing.

In a sworn affidavit, the businessman says the claim was made in a newspaper article.

“As the chief operating officer of Tatu City Limited, I was intrigued by the article and sought to find out more details,” the affidavit indicates.

Mr Barron said he obtained a copy of the letter, which was the basis of the article and the letter “makes serious allegations, particularly those of bribery.” “Although the letter requests the Chief Justice to investigate the claims, the allegations are serious. I have lost confidence in the judge,” the businessman says in the affidavit.

He said to ensure that justice is seen to be done, the judge should disqualify himself from hearing the case and have it allocated to another judge.

On Thursday, other parties agreed to file their responses before the case proceeds.

“When such an application is made against a judge, the case cannot proceed until it is dispensed with within the shortest time possible,” Justice Ogola said Thursday. A ruling will be made on October 13.