BY SAM ALFAN.
Human Rights activist Okiyah Omtatah has protested a move by Chief Justice David Maraga calling for a court file challenging the skewed manner in which the Auditor General was recruited.
In a letter, Omtatah wants the Chief Justice to make full disclosure within 48 hours, why he called for the court file.
The activist says he got the shock of his life on Wednesday morning when Employment and Labour Relations court judge Stephen Radido informed the open court that he could not deliver the judgement, because the file had been recalled the CJ.
“The learned judge directed the parties that the judgement will be given on notice after the Chief Justice is through with the file and he returns it to the trial court,” the judge said.
Omtatah says that the CJ does not have powers under the law to interfere with the work of other judges.
” The only two occasions under the law when a file are sent up to him are when he is asked to empanel an uneven bench of judges to hear a matter certified as raising a substantial question of law and when the Judicial Service Commission calls for a file following complaints formally lodged with it against a trial judge and to the best of my knowledge, none of the occasion obtained herein,” says Omtatah.
He adds that he reasonably suspects that he is confronted with the impunity of the chief justice who wants to interfere with the autonomy of the trial court and have a judgment bearing the colours of his mind.
At the same time the activist has also filed an application asking judge Radido to recuse himself from hearing or rendering the judgement in the matter.
The activist now wants the Chief Justice to appoint a bench of not less than three judges to hear and determine the matter which raises substantial questions of the law.
He says the decision by chief justice to call for the file was tantamount to interference with the independence of the trial judge.
“The independent of individual judges , who are tasked with interpreting and applying the law in specific cases is a very important part of this principal”, says Omtatah.
The activist also says that the circumstances under which the file was taken to the chief justice remain obscure and susceptible to raising serious doubts on decisional independence of the judge in relation to the extant suit.
” In the interest of justice that the integrity of this court is to safeguard by insulating it from actions, administrative or otherwise, that in effect could undermine the principles set in out at Article 48,50(1), 159 and 161(1) of the constitution “, says Omtatah.
He also adds that the application does not seek to cast aspersions on the person of the presiding judge but rather it requests the court to apply its mind to the fact that whichever way the court rules its decision will be perceived as bearing the colours of the mind of the chief justice.
” There is a likelihood of bias as the matters complained of are capable of creating reasonable doubt in the minds of members of the public about fairness in the administration of justice “, Omtatah adds.
He further states that the prayer for recusal is sensible and is not a vehicle for shopping for judges and is ready to have the matter heard by any other judge without any reference.
