Senior counsel Ahmednasir Abdullahi will appear before a tribunal on Monday to answer to claims of soliciting a Sh100 million bribe.
Businesswoman Rose Mbithe had claimed before the tribunal on Wednesday that Ahmednasir asked for a bribe to help her in a property suit.
And yesterday, State lawyer Nazima Malik told the tribunal led by appellate judge David Maraga that Abdullahi had confirmed he would appear to answer to the allegations.
Ms Mbithe, who is a Sehit Investments director, said Abdullahi had first asked for Sh4 million through one Rashid Hussein, who is her family friend. The lawyer, she said, later asked for Sh20-30million to help her sort out the case.
Mbithe further told the tribunal that after the suit house in Karen, Nairobi was valued at Sh220 million, the lawyer asked for half the value of the property (Sh110million).
READ MORE
It's anybody's guess as Judiciary and senior lawyers dare each other
Sonko to appear in court for fresh trial in Sh20m graft case
Anti-graft agency can't extricate itself from ODPP's grip easily
The tribunal is investigating suspended judge Joseph Mutava's suitability to continue serving as a judge.
At the same time, Justice Mutava wants Chief Justice Willy Mutunga to appear before the tribunal to clarify the correspondence between retired judge Leonard Njagi and the suspended High Court judge.
Through his lawyer Philip Nyachoti, Mutava wants the CJ to shed light on claims by Njagi that he attempted to influence him in the case through a text message.
"We are requesting for the CJ to appear so that he can clarify the instructions he gave Bidali (Judiciary ombudsperson Kennedy Bidali)," said Mr Nyachoti.
Mr Bidali had testified before the tribunal that Mutunga interrogated Njagi over the matter and that the former judge showed him a text message from Mutava that was seeking to influence him to rule in Mbithe's favour.
This prayer was, however, protested against by Mr Malik, who argued that the legal basis was not sufficient. Bidali, in his testimony, said because he was a magistrate, he was not allowed to interview a judge and that is why the CJ took over from him.
Additionally, the tribunal was told that parties involved in the Goldenberg case did not object to the judicial case being heard by Mutava, who was in the commercial division.
