Bench Appointment Sparks Legal Debate: CJ's Independence vs Recusal
The appointment of a bench by Chief Justice Martha Koome has sparked a legal debate. Lawyer Nelson Havi argued that the CJ should have delegated the task to her deputy, Justice Philomena Mwilu. Havi also raised concerns about gender representation and seniority in the appointed bench.
Havi contended that Justices Charles Kariuki, Bahati Mwamuye, and Lawrence Mugambi should recuse themselves from cases involving the Supreme Court Justices suing the Judicial Service Commission (JSC). He argued that the CJ had appointed an all-male bench, disregarding seniority and gender balance.
Justice Koome's lawyer, George Oraro, countered that the issue had already been settled by Justices Mwamuye and Mugambi. He maintained that the CJ had no vested interest in the appointment. Justice Njoki Ndung'u supported the CJ, stating that her office is independent and cannot be pressured or controlled.
The Attorney General, Dorcas Oduor, expressed confidence in the court's handling of the matter. Justices Isaac Lenaola, William Ouko, and Smokin Wanjala, however, raised concerns that weighing Havi's argument could imply that no Judge should hear cases against the Presidency.
The debate surrounding the appointment of the bench by Chief Justice Martha Koome continues. While Havi argues for recusal and better representation, the CJ's office maintains its independence. The court will decide whether to review Havi's arguments, potentially setting a precedent for future cases.
