AG furious as LSK asks him to resign over Anglo Leasing

By FELIX OLICK

Kenya: The Law Society of Kenya (LSK) is now demanding the resignation of Attorney General Githu Muigai regarding the controversial Sh1.4 billion Anglo Leasing payments as they unveiled fresh details of the saga.

The society has threatened to file a suit against the AG, Solicitor General Njee Muturi and Senior Deputy Solicitor General Muthoni Kimani to be declared unsuitable to hold office.

LSK has also indicated that it will be seeking to have the three surcharged for any monies paid to the two Anglo Leasing-type firms, First Mercantile Securities Corporation and Universal Satspace.

But Prof Muigai reacted furiously to the move, and termed the LSK Council as ‘highly unethical, unprofessional and driven by petty and irresponsible politics in weighty national matters’. “The introduction of petty and irresponsible politics in weighty national matters is totally unbecoming of the Council of the Law Society of Kenya,” Muigai said in a statement sent to newsrooms.

Yesterday LSK chairman Eric Mutua announced that they intend to strike Prof Muigai from the Roll of Senior Counsel terming him ‘a let-down to lawyers’. “This is fraud and fraud all the way,” declared the LSK chairman after a hurriedly convened council meeting.

“The office of the Attorney General has acted in unconstitutional, illegal and unprofessional manner and has conspired with the Executive,” In a strongly-worded statement, the society also resolved that it would ask the three Government officials to show cause why a Certificate of Dishonour by LSK should not be issued against them.

LSK criticised Prof Muigai for giving a misleading legal opinion to President Uhuru Kenyatta and declaring that the Government had no other legal option but to pay shadowy figures, yet an appeal option was and is still available.

“Failure by the Attorney General to pursue an available appeal option was a dereliction of the Constitution mandate under Article 156 to protect and uphold the rule of law and defend public interest,” they maintained.

However, the AG singled out Mutua and President of the East Africa Law Society, James Mwamu and threatened to cite the society for contempt, arguing that the matter was before the Court of Appeal.  “In the circumstances the conduct of the council is highly unethical, unprofessional, irresponsible and actuated by malice.”

Criminal offences

He said Mutua was himself under investigation by the Director of Public Prosecutions on the advice of Kenya Police for alleged criminal offences relating to the illegal and unlawful sale of Malili ranch.

“One would expect him, of all people, to have respect for the due process of law,” Githu noted.

“One can, therefore, only speculate as to the motive of this pretentious, pompous, self-righteous and sanctimonious statement attributed to the chairman and a section of his council.”

He also hit out at Mwamu, who is representing LSK in the suit, and said his conduct ‘offends the code of professional ethics’. LSK had insisted that Kenya lost the case because of negligence of the

AG and observed that last year, his office took over the case unprocedurally from a foreign law firm that was representing the State. As a result, the Solicitor General, who is not registered to practice in England and Wales, represented the country before the London Court.

“Effectively the Kenyan Government did not have legal representation in the suit and the proceedings are a nullity,” said Mutua.

LSK also said that despite the Grand Coalition Government directing the AG to engage foreign competent advocates in the suit, Githu frustrated Government lawyers by failing to issue instructions and respond to their correspondences.

But LSK also criticised the London judge who issued the orders for allowing Muturi, who is not registered to practice in the court, to appear, and noted that he was either incompetent or compromised.

“He entered judgment against the Government of Kenya based on hearsay and oral presentation without documentary evidence on the amounts agreed at the mediation,” they protested.

As a result, LSK intends to petition the British Government to investigate the entire proceedings with a view to establish whether there was conspiracy involving the judicial officer.

LSK also said it was contracting its counterparts, the Law Society of England and Wales, to follow up on the case. But as it announced the punitive action against the top Government officials, LSK said it was still pursuing the option of stopping the payments.

Mutua said the LSK was reaching out to Chief Justice Willy Mutunga to allow the Court of Appeal to hear their petition tomorrow and possibly issue an order stopping the payments. “We are not sure whether the money has been paid or not. We are worried that the appeal may be rendered moot,” he stated.

Mutua said the new Constitution did not allow Executive Orders to Treasury for payments without being sanctioned by Parliament.

Earlier, LSK had attempted to stop the payments at the High Court but Justice David Majanja threw the burden to Parliament, arguing that the matter was before the National Assembly.

Justice Majanja said stopping Treasury Cabinet Secretary Henry Rotich from making the payment would amount to interfering with MPs’ role in checking the government’s financial expenditure.

The LSK then filed an appeal before the Court of Appeal for further orders.

In the meantime the LSK has requested that Mutunga sets up a panel of three judges for purposes of determining the matter and a ruling on that application is expected on Friday, May 23. But on May 16, President Kenyatta authorised the National Treasury to pay the firms.

The President argued that it was the only way the country could secure the Euro bond, and noted that not paying the debt would mean cutting back on Government expenditure and service delivery of programmes for Kenyans.

But his action has also attracted the wrath of the opposition alliance CORD which has threatened to organise mass action protests to oppose the payments.