Breaking News: Old Kijabe dam tragedy: Death toll rises to 45
Verdict to fire judges upheld
What you need to know:
- The Supreme Court unanimously agreed that the judges were fairly sacked.
- They lifted an order, which had stopped degazetting of the sacked judges.
More than 10 judges were finally dismissed after the Supreme Court reaffirmed the decision declaring them unfit to continue serving in the Judiciary.
The Supreme Court unanimously agreed that the judges were fairly sacked by the Judges and Magistrates Vetting Board, and that the High Court had no jurisdiction to review the board’s final decisions.
They lifted an order, which had stopped degazetting of the sacked judges and ruled the Constitution was clear that the board’s work would not be subject to any supervision from any court.
Chief Justice Willy Mutunga said Kenyans wanted a Judiciary they could have confidence in through appointment of new judges and clean-up of those serving through vetting.
“The voice of the people cannot be silenced through any court of law,” he said.
ENDED LONG CAREERS
The ruling ended the long careers of former Appellate Judges Riaga Omollo, Samuel Bosire, Joseph Nyamu and Emmanuel O’Kubasu.
Others are former High Court Judges Jean Gacheche, Mary Ang’awa, Murugi Mugo, Joyce Khaminwa, Grace Nzioka, Leonard Njagi and Muga Apondi.
They had filed petitions at the High Court challenging their sackings on grounds that the vetting board did not subject them to fair trial, that it failed to consider their legitimate expectation and equality before the law.
The court then issued orders stopping the Judicial Service Commission from degazetting them as judges and allowed them to continue receiving their pay and privileges.
The Supreme Court, however, said the orders were irregular since the Constitution did not envisage a review of the board’s decision.
“The board had an obligation to fulfil the public trust in them. The process was to enhance accountability and to rid the Judiciary of people they thought were an impediment to justice. It is a time every judicial officer has to be accountable for his deeds,” the judges ruled.
Although the High Court has the power to entertain any petition by any person alleging violation of rights, the powers donated to the vetting board were unique and designed to curtail it from judicial interference.
