A fresh petition has been filed by an advocate of the High court of Kenya to remove Chief Justice Martha Koome from her position.
According to the petitioner, Christopher Rosana, the chief justice is incompetent and does not deserve to hold her office.
Moreover, the petition is grounded in Article 168 of the Constitution, which outlines the procedures and reasons for the removal of a judge, in this case, the Chief Justice, due to alleged incompetence.
While issuing several reasons for the move, he has noted that a judge may be declared incompetent based on the potential consequences of a misstep.
“It also means that the gravity of potential consequences is the guiding factor and not whether there has been a “pattern of inappropriate conduct over a period of time.
“The Petitioner therefore prays that the Chief Justice be removed from office due to incompetence as per the Constitution,” the petition reads in part.
Also Read: Ahmednasir Blasts CJ Koome over Shortlisted Court of Appeal Judges
Grounds for the Petition
According to the petition, on January 18, 2024, the Supreme Court’s full seven-judge bench issued a letter (referred to as “the Communication”) that terminated the right of Senior Counsel Ahmednasir Abdullahi to appear before the Court.
Further, it details that the Registrar of the Supreme Court told Ahmednasir that the seven justices had decided he would not be allowed to appear before the Court, whether on his own behalf, through his firm’s employees, or anyone acting on his instructions.
Also, on January 22, 2024, an associate from Ahmednasir’s law firm attempted to appear before Deputy Registrar Bernard Kasavuli but was denied an audience based on the earlier communication.
The petition argues that the Chief Justice’s leadership in this decision, and its implementation, highlights her incompetence, adding that she is solely responsible for the decision that had been made.
Also Read: Ahmednasir Sues CJ Martha Koome Over Supreme Court Ban
Reasons that Support the Removal of CJ Martha Koome
He has based his petition on the following accounts.
Account 1. Christopher Rosana has argued that with more than 15 years of experience as a superior court judge, the Chief Justice could not foresee that implementing the decision embodied in the Communication could be challenged under the Fair Administrative Action Act, 2015.
Account 2. He has also noted that the Chief Justice failed to apply her knowledge of the elementary principle that no man can be a judge in his own case (nemo judex in causa sua). All the judges of the Supreme Court having been sued at the High Court in Petition E026 of 2024.
Account 3. The Chief Justice, as the President of the Supreme Court, has set in motion a constitutional crisis that will only embarrass the Judiciary and the administration of justice. It does not matter how long it may take for Petition E026 of 2024 to reach the Supreme Court.
Account 4: Rosana says that the Chief Justice would have guided the Supreme Court bench towards other respectable options that would have avoided the regrettable scenarios.
Account 5: The Chief Justice has set a dangerous precedent concerning the right of audience to counsel.
“If the Supreme Court can deny audience to counsel without considering neither the potential consequences nor the proper legal options available.”
Follow our WhatsApp Channel for real-time news updates!
https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VaB3k54HltYFiQ1f2i2C
