Post-2010 judges should not be vetted, rules top court
What you need to know:
- The decision reaffirmed both the High Court and Court of Appeal rulings which found that the board was wrong to investigate judges and magistrates beyond August 2010.
- The Supreme Court said it is the Judicial Service Commission which has the power to deal with unethical conduct of officers appointed after the new Constitution came into effect.
- The dispute started at the High Court when the Kenya Magistrates and Judges Association claimed that the vetting board had overstepped its mandate in entertaining complaints against them which arose after the date provided by the constitution.
Judges and magistrates appointed after promulgation of the Constitution in 2010 are not being investigated by the vetting board, the Supreme Court has ruled.
A unanimous decision of seven judges said the mandate of the Judges and Magistrates Vetting Board was limited to probing judicial officers in office before August 2010.
“The board can only investigate the conduct of judges and magistrates who were in office on the effective date of the Constitution,” the judges said.
The decision reaffirmed both the High Court and Court of Appeal rulings which found that the board was wrong to investigate judges and magistrates beyond August 2010.
The Supreme Court said it is the Judicial Service Commission which has the power to deal with unethical conduct of officers appointed after the new Constitution came into effect.
“The vetting cannot continue in the face of another constitutional body which checks the conduct of judges,” they ruled.
The dispute started at the High Court when the Kenya Magistrates and Judges Association claimed that the vetting board had overstepped its mandate in entertaining complaints against them which arose after the date provided by the constitution.
