BY SAM ALFAN.
Mombasa gubernatorial candidate Mike Sonko has moved back to the Supreme Court seeking a review of the decision made last week, which found his impeachment was proper hence locking out of the race to succeed Hassan Joho.
Sonko has also moved to the regional court court seeking suspension of the supreme court decision.
He says the decision of the Supreme Court and courts of Kenya was arrived at in an unjust manner.
Sonko says in an application filed as urgent that it is only fair that the top court’s decision be reviewed because the conduct of Justice Said Chitembwe has been put to question.
Justice Chitembwe sat in a bench of three judges including Weldon Korir and Wlifrida Okwany that found Sonko’s impeachment by the Senate was proper.
Sonko says one of the grounds that led to the suspension of Justice Chitembwe was discussing his case outside the court and the failure to recuse himself when he was asked to.
“I Know of my own knowledge that the Judicial Service Commission upon preliminary investigations passed a resolution suspending the honourable Justice Said Chitembwe and made a recommendation to the President for the appointment of a tribunal to investigate the conduct of the judge,” he said.
Meanwhile, Sonko has also filed a petition before the East African Court of Justice and now wants his name included in the August 9 General Election, pending the determination of his matter.
Sonko wants the regional court to issue interim orders suspending the execution of the Judgment rendered by the Supreme Court.
He also wants the court to give him time at the appropriate time, adduce the final detailed judgment, certified copies of proceedings, rulings and any additional documentations pertaining to the proceedings at the top court, when they are availed to him.
The former Nairobi governor has faulted the move by the Supreme Court to determine the matter, without giving him time to file his submissions and evidence.
The former Governor also accused Chief Justice Martha Koome who had made some statements saying impeached Governor’s should not be in the ballot for refusal to recuse herself from hearing the appeal.
In his court documents filed before EAC court, Sonko adds that he is gravely and fundamentally aggrieved by the decision of the Supreme Court and in the manner in which the said Court conducted the said proceedings contrary to the rule of law and the rules of natural justice with the resultant effect of a grave injustice and miscarriage of justice being visited upon him and the people he represents.
“The Judicial arm of the Kenyan Government abdicated its mandate and duties as independent organs of the Kenyan Republic; discharged their constitutional mandate whilst disregarding the purposes and principles of the Kenyan Constitution and the principles of the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community,” says Sonko in the court documents.
He adds that the actions by the Judiciary are in breach of Articles 6 (d); and 7 (2); of the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community in that he has been discriminated against and has been selectively persecuted and his fundamental political rights, freedoms illegally, unlawfully, and unjustifiably curtailed over a flawed judicial process tainted and marred by illegalities, lack of transparency, lack of accountability and failure to adhere to the rule of law.
He adds that the decision by the Supreme Court of Kenya was arrived at in an unjust manner; contrary to the above cited principles and the effect of the said decision is to curtail his political rights including the right to contest for elective position and participate in elections as a contestant.
“The decision by the Kenyan Judicial arm is tainted in illegality as the decision of the High Court of Kenya as upheld by the Supreme Court is vitiated and was influenced through corrupt means and the Presiding Judge who rendered the said decision is currently facing a disciplinary Tribunal over his removal as a result of receiving bribes in order to influence the said decision,” he adds.
According to Sonko, the suspended Judge Juma Chitembwe is one of the Judges who presided over the hearing and determination of his appeal at the High Court, in which he had challenged the impeachment from office as a Governor for Nairobi City County, is currently facing disciplinary proceedings for his removal from office in regard to the manner in which he conducted himself in the determination of the Petition at the High Court of Kenya.
“The said Judge admits in various recordings of his improprieties, influence, coercion and malpractices including receiving and soliciting for bribes in order to influence the outcome of the said Judgment, which ultimately happened and the said Judgment of the High Court was actuated by coercion, bribery and fraud and the said Judgment denudates any Judgment of reliability and should be set aside, vacated and varied based on the said Judges confession and admissions on impropriety,” says Sonko.
The former City boss boss adds that it is in the public domain that the Chief Justice Martha Koome, has prior to the decision, rendered and expressed herself publicly on his case and affirmed the position that he does not stand a chance to vie and contest for public office.
He adds that the Supreme Court had a predetermined mind and disposition and had already made up a decision to condemn and persecute the Applicant in the judicial proceedings before it.
Sonko adds that the actions by the judicial arm of the Kenyan Government contravene and go against the
Bangalore Principles on judicial conduct and the actions go against the principles of Judicial independence is a pre-requisite to the rule of law and a fundamental guarantee of a fair trial.
A judge shall therefore uphold and exemplify judicial independence in both its individual and institutional aspects.
A judge shall exercise the judicial function independently on the basis of the judge’s assessment of the facts and in accordance with a conscientious understanding of the law, free of any extraneous influences, inducements, pressures, threats or interference, direct or indirect, from any quarter of for any reason.
In performing judicial duties, a judge shall be independent of judicial colleagues in respect of decisions which the judge is obliged to make independently,” Sonko says.
It further states that the judge shall exhibit and promote high standards of judicial conduct in order to reinforce public confidence in the judiciary which is fundamental to the maintenance of judicial independence.
