Blog Page 3

MWILU DEFENDS HER APPOINTMENT AS THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE.

0

BY PHOEBE WANJOHI.

Deputy Chief Justice Philomena Mwilu has defended her appointment as the acting Chief Justice saying it was done in accordance with the law.

Saying she was carrying out administrative duty due in the absence of the Chief Justice, Mwilu also defended the move by Chief Justice David Maraga to appoint her in acting capacity.

In response to a petition by activist Okiya Omtatah, said, “The letter dated December 11, 2020, from the Chief Justice to myself was a formal administrative notification of the matters set out therein and the challenge thereto, which is not merited, ought to have been addressed to the Chief Justice and not the Respondent or the attorney General.”

Mwilu adds that section 5 (4) of the Judicial Service Act No 1 of 2011 designates an Acting Chief Justice in the absence of the Chief Justice.

She said the law entitles the holder of office of Deputy Chief to act as the Chief Justice for a period not exceeding six months pending the appointment of a new Chief Justice.

“It follows therefore that Acting Chief Justice is an intervention arising by express operation of the law and not a creation or the wish of an outgoing Chief Justice as implied by Omtatah,” she said.

She further argue that she believes that it is not lawful or in the public interest for the Kenyan public to be denied the benefit of the administrative duties and functions of the Chief Justice which I am entitled to perform in an acting capacity on account of complaints before the Respondent which have not culminated in my suspension or removal from office.

In her affidavit, Mwilu said she has not been suspended from the office of Deputy Chief Justice and Judge of Supreme Court by the JSC or removed by a tribunal in the manner contemplated by Article 168 (4) and (5) of The Constitution of Kenya.

“I have served as Deputy Chief Justice and Judge of the Supreme Court throughout the pendency of the litigation and petitions for my removal referred to hereinabove and continue serving as such to date”, Mwilu adds.

But in further response Omtatah argues that where there is no substantive Chief Justice to delegate or assign duties and give direction, the DCJ cannot perform any duties, let alone act as the Chief Justice.  

He argues that once the Chief Justice vacates office at the expiry of his or her tenure, or for whatever reasons, the office of the Deputy Chief Justice also falls vacant for all practical purposes. Otherwise, the untenable situation arises where a Deputy Chief Justice can serve in office for more than ten years, longer than the maximum allowed a Chief Justice.  

Omtatah reiterates that just like a Chief Justice who vacates office before attaining the mandatory retirement age of 70 years is eligible to continue serving as a judge of the Supreme Court, the Deputy Chief Justice who vacates office is eligible to serve if he or she is under the retirement age.  

“Both the Chief Justice and the Deputy Chief Justice have no security of tenure except as judges. It is only by being judges that the holders of the two offices enjoy security of tenure”, adds Omtatah.

Omtatah petitioned the High Court to stop Deputy Chief Justice Philomena Mwilu from becoming the acting Chief Justice upon retirement of current CJ David Maraga in January.

Omtatah has petitioned the High Court to stop Deputy Chief Justice Philomena Mwilu from becoming the acting Chief Justice upon retirement of current CJ David Maraga in January.

In his petition, Omtatah urged the court to issue a temporary order suspending the the letter REF: CJ/PERS of December 11, 2020 which the outgoing Chief Justice of Kenya and President of the Supreme Court of Kenya wrote purported to appoint the DCJ Philomena Mwilu to act as the Chief Justice and perform all duties and functions of Chief Justice from December 12, 2020.

The said letter indicated the DCJ will act the CJ until a new Chief Justice is appointed in accordance with the Constitution of Kenya.

Justice Murima will deliver the ruling on January 12.

SONKO WINS ROUND ONE IN BATTLE TO SAVE HIS JOB.

0

BY SAM ALFAN.

The High Court has suspended Nairobi gubernatorial by-election scheduled for February 18.

Justice Anthony Mrima suspended the by-election after impeached Nairobi Governor Mike Sonko, filed a case arguing that his case raises weighty issues, which might be rendered useless if the by-election is not suspended.

The Judge suspended the gazette notice published by the Senate Speaker Ken Lusaka on the December 17, 2020 pending the hearing and determination of Sonko’s case.

“A conservatory Order be and is hereby issued suspending any Gazette Notice on the Assumption of Office of Governor of Nairobi City County dated December 18, 2020 pending the hearing and determination of the Petition”, ordered the judge. 

The ousted city county boss argued that he should be accorded a chance to articulate them and he will suffer irreparable damage not compensatable in monetary terms because he stands to lose his position as the governor of Nairobi City county without the due process of the Law, the rule of law and constitutionalism.

He adds that on the preponderance of evidence, the scales of justice tilts in favour of issuing the conservatory Orders because there is sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the process did not meet the legal threshold of 2/3, it was not transparent, accountable and verifiable and its integrity is in question.

He further argued that it will be disproportionate to punish him through removal from office which is finality before due process, the rule of law and constitutionalism is strictly followed to safeguard the doctrine of separation of powers, sub-judice and check and balances.

“The Respondents in total disregard of the express provisions of the assumption of Office of the Governor Act moved to swear the speaker of the Nairobi City County Assembly as the acting Governor on the December 21,2020 at 10:00 am at KICC Comesa Grounds.

“Taking the exceptional circumstances of this case into account, it is in the interest of justice to issue the conservatory Orders”, he further added. 

He said Nairobi MCAs purported to debate on the December 3, 2020 and impeach him without following the prescribed procedure and the Assembly transmitted the said motion to the Senate vide a letter dated December 4, 2020. 

“The Petitioner contends that the Motion was illegal, null and invalid since it did not meet  the requisite legal threshold to warrant an impeachment process to commence and that the entre process violated Article 10 (1) and (2) of the constitution of Kenya as it lacked integrity, it was not transparent and verifiable,” he said.

He also contends that the said motion dated the November 25, 2020 was  purportedly debated and passed by the Nairobi City County Assembly on the December 3,  2020 in circumstances that are contrary and in violation of democratic principles enunciated under Article 174 (a) and (i) of the Constitution of Kenya, 2020 which requires the devolved system to promote democratic and accountable exercise of power. The Motion also breached the principles of checks and balances and separation of powers.

Consequently, and in view of the foregoing, it is clear that unless restrained by an order of the Court, the assembly is likely to act in violation of the provisions of the constitution and or to perpetuate the constitutional breaches already committed by the Assembly clerk. 

He also argue that resolution of the  December 3, 2020 was further made by the Nairobi City County Assembly in utter breach and or disregard of the democratic principles and separation of power contrary to Article 175 of the Constitution of Kenya, 2020.

Attendance at the Nairobi City County Assembly’s session on the December 3, 2020 was both physical and virtual whereas the Law and Standing Orders do not contemplate the simultaneous application of both methods of voting for about 57 members and purportedly virtual for others and It is also well settled that some of the MCAs were in Kilifi County outside the jurisdiction of the Nairobi City County and it is not envisaged that they could vote either physically or virtually contrary to the provisions of the Standing Orders.

The MCAs that were outside Nairobi have alleged that their accounts were hacked or corrupted and strangers purported to Log In and vote on their behalf.

FRAUD TRIAL AGAINST BUSINESSMAN ADJOURNED TO JANUARY.

0

BY PHOEBE WANJOHI.

 The hearing of a case in which businessman Patrick Omani Nyamweya is charged with conspiracy to defraud Samco Holding Limited of a parcel of land worth Sh335 million has been pushed to January.

Milimani Chief Magistrate Martha Mutuku directed the case to be heard on January 12, and ordered the investigating officer to supply the accused person with all witness documents.

Omani is accused that on unknown dates and place, jointly with others not before court and with intent to defraud, they conspired to defraud Samco Holdings limited of the parcel of land.

According to the charge sheet, land on Mombasa road measuring 0.009 hectares is valued Sh335 million.

The court heard that they fraudulently registered the said land in the name of Innfield Investments limited.

He is also charged with forgery. It is alleged that on unknown date and place Omani with others not before court with intent to defraud Samco Holdings limited forged a signature of rigistrar of title Elizabeth Gicheha on a grant dated June 30,1999 purporting to genuine from the said Gicheha a fact he knew was false.

Omani is also charged with making false documents and malicious damage. He and others not before court damaged Samco Holdings limited property worth Sh50, 000.

Another accused person Yusuf Moalim Hassan is also charged with forgery and making false documents.

The prosecution has listed four witnesses to testify in the case but more will be named as the trial starts.

The case was reported at Muthaiga Police Station.

CORRUPTION: WHY IT KEEPS CROPPING IN THE JUDICIARY.

0

BY SAM ALFAN.

Accusations of corruption, bias and gross misconduct against judges and magistrates is nothing new.

The judicial officers face such accusations almost daily. Some litigants even file complaints before the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) but fail to substantiate the claims.

One thing that is clear though from the accusations is that it erodes public confidence in the Judiciary and affects the output of judges.

For some judges, claims of bias or corruption are leveled against them as a ploy to intimidate them to rule in their favour or abandon the case all together. A polite term used by judges against such lawyers is forum-shopping.

Following the 2017 general election, hundreds of cases were filed in courts across the country. Some ended before the Supreme Court.

similarly, a flurry of complaints were filed before the JSC by disgruntled petitioners. Most of these cases were either dismissed for lack of evidence or withdrawn by the complainants.

Recently, the JSC dismissed a petition filed last against four judges of the Supreme Court, over the manner in which they handled the Wajir gubernatorial election petition.

Jared Ongeri wanted Justices Jackton Ojwang (now retired), Mohammed Ibrahim, Smokin Wanjala and Njoki Ndung’u removed from office over allegations of bribery.

But the commission dismissed the petition because Ongeri failed to furnish evidence implicating the judges.

Another judge, Justice Nzioki wa Makau was accused of corruption, bias and impartiality while handling a petition filed by ousted Nairobi Governor Mike Sonko, who sought to stop his impeachment.

Lawyer Ndegwa Njiru for Nairobi County Assembly accused the Employment and Labour Relations Court Judge of receiving Sh7 million from Sonko to influence the ruling.

The judge termed the allegations as laughable and although he recused himself from handling the matter, he said the claims of bribery were baseless.

The Court of Appeal judges found themselves in a similar situation and the judges were infuriated by the claims.

In the case of Mohammed Jawayd Iqbal against former MP George Boniface Mbogua Nyanja, lawyer Kingara who represented the former legislator made the accusation.

He claimed that judges Asike Makhandia and Patrick Kiage strangely handled the case, yet they had been transferred to Kisumu.

“We think that a little familiarization with the way this Court works, and how Judges are empanelled, would have advised caution on the part of Nyanja and his advocate before casting aspersions on the two judges for sitting and hearing cases as directed by the President of the Court in exercise of his legitimate powers. We did not hear any objection against the two judges sitting on the day,” said the bench.

The judges together added they thought it was scandalous and beneath lawyer Kinga’ra’s to claim that Sankale ole Kantai, was hostile towards.

The lawyer had claimed that the judge would not allow him to argue his appeal but kept interrupting him incessantly.

“A little attempt at honesty would have shown the claims to be ludicrous and advised against such false and disparaging remarks. The notes take by all three judges and the judgment itself indicate that Mr. King’ara argued his appeal to the full extent of his abilities. Neither Kantai JA nor the other Judges did what counsel alleges, and it is a sad day that such outright falsehoods can be spewed under oath by an officer of the court or by his own averment nearly 3 decades at the bar. For him to claim that we were rude or hostile to him can only be a figment of a fecund imagination. Ultimately, the allegations are a classic and sad case of an advocate trying to tear down the court house after losing a case”, said the judges.

They added that claims of bias made should at the very least have required some backing up with evidence.

“Try as we might, we have not seen in the application or in the affidavits in support thereof even an iota of evidence indicative of bias on the part of the Court. What we see instead is a strained stretching of facts into tortuous contortions in an attempt to make a case for review. Such attempts unbacked by evidence and riding only on strident cries of bias and unfairness, without more, would never move a self-respecting bench of this Court into a review of its final judgment. It requires more, much more, to meet the threshold for review, and the application before us misses it by a mile”, added judges while dismissing the application.

Senior Counsel Ahmednasir Abdullahi has continuously tweeted claims that one of the Supreme Court judges received a bribe of Sh220 million from a party who had a case before the court and the unnamed was struggling to repay the money.

“On that matter of Sh 220 Million BRIBE and the SENIOR judge of the Supreme Court who alleged that he DIDN’T EAT ALONE but shared with TWO OTHER JUSTICES of the Court…who brokered this Deal?” tweeted Ahmednasir.

He further tweeted that when the senior judge of the Supreme Court was asked to refund the Sh 220 million, he angrily retorted “but you know very well i DIDN’T EAT ALONE. I shared it with TWO OTHERS. Why are you victimising me…in Jesus’s name be fair.”

In his tweets Ahmednasir also pointed a finger on Chief Justice David Maraga saying he headed for his retirement without shedding light on the matter.

“Maraga’s tenure in the Supreme Court was defined by grand corruption,” said Ahmednasir.

According to Ahmednasir, the greatest obstacle to clean Judiciary is Senior lawyers

“Since judicial reform and cleaning independence…the GREATEST OBSTACLE to judicial reform and cleaning the Kenyan judiciary has been SENIOR LAWYERS. As OWNERS/SHAREHOLDERS of the system they fight tooth and nail to preserve the status quo and will go to any length to protect their INTEREST”, Tweeted Ahmednasir.

Veteran lawyer Gitobu Imanyara says that the new constitutional dispensation expanded democratic space so much so that demands of accountability are now firmly entrenched.

“It is the fear of being publicly exposed that is creating this perception that you are alluding to. Judges are a lot more exposed because in every case they handle the losing side will make allegations of corruption or undue influence. Also more and more people have become more aware of their rights and a lot more cases are being filed without recruiting more judges to handle them,” Imanyara said.

He added that the executive and legislative branches of government always find fault with the judiciary because it is an easy target and the accusations are often picked up by the social media.

“We have had some really good judgements from the Constitution and Human Rights division of the High Court,” adds Imanyara.

Lawyer Wambua Kilonzo believes these accusations affect judge’s in execution of their duties.

“They are intimidated. But they don’t say it. They put forth a false bravado and as you can see cases affecting top politicians facing either graft or impeachment cases…a judge opts to disqualif himself or herself,” adds the lawyer.

In directly, files involving politicians or influential people keep moving from one judge to another and sometimes individual judges directs such files to be placed before the division presiding judges to allocate file to another judge.

Lawyer Kilonzo adds that CJ Maraga tried to protect judges but he could only do so much but the intimidation is real.

GSU OFFICER AND THREE GUARDS CHARGED WITH FAILURE TO PREVENT ROBBERY AT MANU CHANDARIA’S HOME.

0

BY SAM ALFAN.

A GSU officer and two security guards have been charged with failing to prevent robbery at the home of businessman Manu Chandaria.

Also charged with failure to prevent the robbery at Chandaria’s home was a house help, who worked at the home.

Jared Obanga, Stephen Omwenga, Juda Wafula and Jackson Nalondo appeared before Milimani Chief Magistrate Martha Mutuku and pleaded not guilty to the charge.

The prosecution told the court on December 14, at around 0130hours at house No. 52 along Muthaiga road in Starehe County while they were on duty at the said residence, they failed to use all reasonable means to prevent robbery.

During the robbery, the businessman was robbed of Sh600, 000 and two pieces pearl necklaces worth Sh1.7 million.

The four will remain in custody pending filing of affidavit opposing their release on bail. The Director of Public Prosecution told the court that he needed time to file the affidavit.

Further, the prosecution said they will prefer more charges against the accused persons.

The four had earlier been released on a personal bond of Sh200,000 by a Makadara court.

NIGERIAN LOSES BID TO UNFREEZE SH100 MILLION NABBED AT JKIA.

0

BY SAM ALFAN.

A Nigerian businessman nabbed with Sh100 million at the Jomo Kenyatta International Airport has lost his bid to get his money back.

High Court Anti-Corruption Judge James Wakiaga dismissed Mauzu Bala’s application, seeking to unfreeze the money which is currently being held by the Central Bank of Kenya courtesy of a court order.

“I find no merit in the application for variation of the orders herein at this stage, which I hereby dismiss with cost in the cause,” ruled the judge.

While dismissing Bala’s application, the Judge said that the issue of whether or not he had made the required declaration is not relevant at this stage.

Rather, Justice Wakiaga said, the application which was before the court was for preservation of the money, the source and legality of it, pending a petition for forfeiture proceedings if filed by the Asset Recovery Agency (ARA).

The judge further noted that from the material placed before him, Bala’s contention was that the order was obtained on the basis of material non-disclosure on the basis that another application had been made before a magistrate. He said the magistrate could still have issued an ordere freezing the money.

The Nigerian, who was on transit to Dubai when he was nabbed at JKIA said he had declared the money back in Lagos and was cleared by customs officials.

“On the question of non-declaration of funds at customs. I wish to state I was a passenger on transit to Dubai from Lagos Nigeria.

“At Murtala Mohammed International Airport, I declared the currency and I was cleared by the customs to travel. I checked in the consignment and as is the usual norm in international travels, my next declaration point would have been Dubai International Airport,” Bala said.

In reply to an application by a state agency, he ARA of failing to make full disclosure to the court when the order was issued.

In his court documents, Bala claims that the information given by ARA was not accurate and was intentionally meant to mislead the court.

“I pray that the orders granted be set aside and the court replaces the same with an order directing the money in question be released,” Bala said.

He claims that the Agency filed two applications before the High Court without informing the Magistrate court sitting at JKIA that they had filed an application seeking to seize and preserve his money and a ruling was pending.

In a sworn affidavit, Bala says he was on transit to Dubai and had been cleared by Nigeria customs at Murtala Mohammed International Airport.

He claims during the layover at JKIA officials, not from customs department, who claimed to be police came calling.

He added that he was surprised Kenya Airways which cleared him at Lagos travel aboard their aircraft with “undeclared currency” pounced on him in Nairobi with the intention to deprive him of his money.

BLOW TO LAWYER AS COURT DECLINES TO STOP CHARGES.

0

BY SAM ALFAN.

A lawyer charged with money laundering has lost a bid to quash the accusations.

Charles Mbugua Njuguna lost the application after High Court Judge James Wakiaga rejected his plea for lack of merit.

The lawyer sought to block his prosecution over allegations of receiving money from a company involved in the controversial Sh 100 million irregular procurement software system in the office of Auditor General. 

“I therefore decline to issue any order of prohibition against Prosecution of the applicant (Charles Mbugua Njuguna) or an order of certiorari quashing the charge against him,” ruled Wakiaga.

Njuguna moved to court seeking to prohibit DPP, EACC and Inspector General of Police from charging or facilitating his prosecution before Milimani Anti-Corruptuon Chief Magistrate.

He also urged the court to quash and suspend the decision by DPP to institute criminal proceedings against him.

Njuguna told the court that around November 2013, one of his firm’s client Mars Technology Associate Ltd instructed it to claim some funds owed to them from Osi Kenya ltd.

This was after the firm allegedly rendered professional services and  the amount of Sh39,089,966 would be chanelled through the firm which was dully done. 

He claims upon instructions by his client, he disbursed the funds and retained the legal fee of Sh230,000

The anti-graft body later asked him to record a statement on the funds received by the client which he did. 

In his submission, he claimed he was not aware of the source of the money channelled to his law firm by Osi Kenya Limited or any illegality. 

He said he was arrested on November last year and charged but claims that the decision to charge him must have been made as an afterthought 

Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission opposed the lawyer’s application saying they started investigations following allegations in the office of auditor General involving irregular procurement and purchase Audit Vault Software.

The software was procured at a cost of Sh100 million against an estimated budget of Sh18 million.

The money which was paid to OSI Kenya Limited was thereafter distributed to the individual in the office of the auditor general and their relatives through Njuguna’s firm bank account. 

The commission through Catherine Ngare told the court that during the investigations, Njuguna was never promised to be a witness or suspect so he cannot purport his legitimate expectations was to be a witness.

EX-TETU MP CHARGED WITH FORGERY OVER MULTI-BILLION SHILLINGS KITISURU ESTATE.

0

BY NT CORRESPONDENT.

Troubles seems to worsen for former Tetu MP Ndungu Gethenji after he has been charged with forgery of documents over multibillion shillings estate in Kitusuru.

Appearing virtually before Milmani Chief Magistrate Martha Mutuku, Ndungu denied charges of fraud for forging minutes of a shareholders meeting of Kihingo Village (Waridi Gardens) Management One Ltd.

The offence is said to have been committed on November 21, 2018 when Ndungu’s phone was used to upload incorrect company information to the Registry of Companies through his E-Citizen account.

Ndungu pleaded to the charges after a bid to have the matter settled out of court flopped.

The former MP had ealier been granted more time to see if he would reconcile with his family over the control of Sh20 billion estate.

It is said that Ndungu and his family were the original developers of Kihingo Village, but the MP fell out with his brothers Fredrick Gitahi and Bob over control of the multibillion property.

He claimed to control the estate through ’60B’ shares held by a company he created in 2010.

Kihingo Village in Kitisuru consists of 55 houses, with owners each having one share in the management company, a club house and social amenities.

The alleged forgery concerned attempts to make businessman Chacha Mabanga a director of Kihingo Village (Waridi Gardens) Management One that purported to hold 60 B shares in Kihingo Village(Waridi Gardens) Management that controls the estate.

On Monday this week before the court granted Ndungu time to settle thematter out of court the criminal file mysteriously went missing but was located afternoon.

However Mutuku on Thursday morning ordered ndungu to be released on a bond of Sh 100,000, a surety of the same amount or a cash bail of Sh 20,000.

At the same time the magistrate then recused herself as she is also involved in another case where Ndungu is charged with assaulting Kishore Varsani and lawyer George Wajackoyah within Kihingo estate.

Mutuku recused herself saying handling the matter on the same accused person would amount a conflict of interest.

The pre-trial hearing has been set for January 18, 2021.

RELIEF FOR WIDOW AFTER YEARS BATTLING TO BE PAID FOR HUSBAND’S DEATH.

0

We would like to draw to the parties attention to section 26 (6) of the WIBA Act criminalise non-compesation of work related injury claims.

BY SAM ALFAN.

The Insurance Appeals Tribunal has ordered Mayfair Insurance pay a widow whose husband succumbed to injuries while at his workplace eight years ago.

Tribunal ordered Mayfair Insurance to pay her Sh1.8 million for the loss.

“The Tribunal Orders that interest do accrue on the said sum of Sh. 1,809,000 million and shall be paid by the Interested Party (Mayfair Insurance) to the appellant at court’s rate from the date of the decision by the Director, DOSH of October 6, 2017 to the date of settlement of the claim in full by the Interested Party”, ordered Tribunal.

The Tribunal chaired by veteran lawyer Wambua Kilonzo said Jane Njeri Mwangi should be paid the amount by the underwriter because her husband was insured under the Work Injury Benefits Act (WIBA).

The five member tribunal symapthised with the widow saying she has “knocked on many doors seeking compensation”.

The Tribunal further ordered that, should there be failure by Mayfair Insurance to adhere to its orders No. (c) (d) and (e), the Njeri should be at liberty to take such action as may be appropriate under the Insurance Act, Cap 487 against Mayfair Insurance.

Her husband Stephen Gichuhi Githinji died in 2012 while working for a company known as DOSH in industrial area. The company has since folded.

“To the widow, the Tribunal would wish to draw her attention to the song of ascension contained in Psalms 121 so penned by the Psalmist in the Holy Scriptures. Read and internalize it. Your day of justice is here, look up to the mountain. Your struggle has been real. It has been rewarded with justice delivered today,” Wambua said.

Njeri’s claim has been dismissed by the Commissioner of Insurance after Mayfair said she did not have documents to support her claim.

The underwiter also argued that Njeri filed the claim too late in the day.

But the Tribunal overturned the decision saying that the employer (indemnified by the Insurer) has an obligation under Section 26 (4) of the WIBA Act to settle a claim within 90 days.

“We would like to draw to the parties attention to section 26 (6) of the WIBA Act criminalise non-compesation of work related injury claims”, Tribunal added.

The tribunal added that the Insurer should have asked for documents within 90 days for purposes of settling the claim within the set statutory time limits but the underwriter started seeking for documents five years later.

“If the Insurer was serious in processing the claim they would have sought the issue of documents before the employer closed shop. The Director, DOSH clearly notified the Insurer that employer had already wound up and that the Deceased was dead, the Tribunal then wonders where the widow would have obtained the documents from”, added Tribunal.

Tribunal chairman Wambua also dismissed the objection by Mayfair that the widow could not institute the case because there was nothing to show that she was the wife.

“The Tribunal therefore finds and holds that the Njeri had the requisite standing to make the complaint to the Respondent,” the tribunal ruled.

The Tribunal did not understand Mayfair’s lawyer attempt to further shift the obligation to provide documents to the Deceased five years down the line after the deceased died and the company wound up.

The Tribunal therefore finds and holds that the circumstance of death and winding up of the employer were not of the widow and any acts or ommissions of the employer are not to be visited upon the widow and the lack of documentation is not the widow’s fault or creation.

“The whole purpose of WIBA framework is to see that dependants of the deceased do not suffer after the bread winner dies as a result of work related injuries and the plight of the widow to date is well documented and not disputed.

” In the Tribunal’s mind, this is one of the rare cases that the greater good must be promoted and that justice is not only done but must be seen to be done to the widow”, observed Tribunal.

The Tribunal also noted the documented demand for a bribe of Sh. 300,000 by a third party to the widow so that her compensation can be released.

MARAGA URGES KENYANS TO DEFEND JUDICIARY AS HE RETIRES.

0

BY SAM ALFAN.

The greatest threat facing Kenya is corruption and not Covid19, outgoing Chief Justice David Maraga has said.

Justice Maraga also urged judicial officers to stand firm and defend the law in the fight against corruption. “Don’t be threatened, Kenyans will fight for you if you stand firm,” he said.

The CJ who is on terminal leave pending retirement on January 12, decried the looting of public resources by, unfortunately, the very people entrusted by Kenyans to protect them. He said without the pilferage, Kenya would not need aid.

“We have what is required to take our country to the heights of progress and development,” he added, saying the country was going through trying times but urged Kenyans to protect institutions of governance, as they are the last hope in the country.

“The moment we abdicate our responsibility, the country might fall into anarchy. I want to appeal to everyone to support the Judiciary. We are not perfect,” the CJ said.

Maraga was speaking in Mombasa where he was made a Swahili elder. “I am overwhelmed by the great honour bestowed upon me today as a Swahili elder. I urge judicial officers to ensure that people access justice in an equitable manner,” Maraga added.

Court of Appeal President Justice William Ouko said Justice Maraga has left a legacy of digitization and E-filing.

“You’ve left a great legacy of digitization and E-Filing and we assure you that we shall soldier on to carry on with this digitization mission,” he said.

Chief Registrar of Judiciary Anne Amadi described Justice Maraga as a courageous and bold person whose fidelity to the constitution did not waver.

“You have instilled courage, boldness, integrity, hard work and fidelity to the Constitution and rule of law. You have indeed shown us the way,” Amadi said.