Judges say why they recused themselves from Sh70bn wind power case
Turbines at the Lake Turkana Wind Power farm in Marsabit County. FILE PHOTO | NATION MEDIA GROUP
What you need to know:
Ms Cecilia Ekeno, an interpreter, had also claimed that she was threatened by some of the people pursuing the matter.
Mr Kiprop had claimed that a video clip of his witness testifying in court was being circulated on social media platforms.
Three judges who recused themselves from hearing a case a Sh70 billion wind power project have explained why they made the decision.
Justice Boaz Olao, Justice Enock Cherono and Lady Justice Lucy Mbugua said lawyer Roger Sagana, questioned their impartiality and used “intemperate language and disparaging remarks” while addressing them.
They said lawyer, who is representing a section of residents of Marsabit County opposed acquisition of 150, 000 acres of land for the mega wind power project, had implied that they would be biased in the judgement.
In a 14-page ruling released on Friday, the judges said Mr Sagana had accused the court of taking sides with the interested parties represented by lawyer Patrick Kiprop after ejecting members of the public following the matter from the court.
VIDEO CLIP
Mr Kiprop had claimed that a video clip of his witness testifying in court was being circulated on social media platforms and the witness felt that his life was in danger.
This resulted in the judges kicking out members of public, among them Marsabit Senator Godana Hargura, county speaker and a ward representative who were following the matter, leaving only judges, lawyers and clerks.
Ms Cecilia Ekeno, an interpreter, had also claimed that she was threatened by some of the people pursuing the matter.
Following the ejection of members of the public from the court, Mr Sagana filed an application seeking the adjournment of the case.
Mr Sagana also accused the three-judge bench of acting both as an “investigator and prosecutor” when they addressed the issue of Ms Ekeno in court before handing the matter to the police.
EJECTED
The judges explained that they had ejected people from court since the other alternative to establishing the origin of the video was to ask the police to investigate which would have delayed the matter for long.
They said they were keen to conclude hearing all the witnesses on Friday before Mr Sagana made the harsh attacks.
“This court considers it to be scandalous when counsel refers to it as a court for the “interested parties”, a court acting as “investigator and prosecutor” a court that acts at the behest of one party and a court that acts in a casual manner.
“Any objective person, including Mr Sagana’s clients, listening to those very unfortunate remarks, would take the view that this court is unlikely to be impartial in this case,” the concluded.
