The Supreme Court has dismissed a motion filed by the Nairobi City County Assembly clerk seeking to throw out former Nairobi Governor Mike Sonko’s petition of appeal.
Sonko moved to the Supreme court in March 2022, seeking to challenge his impeachment case which was upheld by both the High Court and the Court of Appeal.
In a verdict issued by the apex court’s five judge-bench on Monday, July 11, the judges criticized Sonko’s conduct and at the same time defended him on grounds they would not lead to adverse orders against him.
“While the conduct of the appellant in not filing the printed copy timeously has not been explained, the circumstances as outlined above would not lead to any adverse orders against him and although his conduct is nonetheless to be deprecated, it is the aim of this Court to focus on the substantive appeal,” the court’s verdict read in part.
“Having therefore considered the Motion, Preliminary Objection plus responses thereto, we must dismiss the Motion and overrule the Preliminary Objection. We shall make no orders as to costs. It is so ordered,”
READ MORE
US Supreme Court: A check or an enabler of second Trump presidency?
Judges freeze Ahmednasir ban case before High Court
Martha Koome: I wish Supreme Court had 11 judges
Court's take on housing tax has impact on public participation
The verdict was given by a bench consisting of Deputy Chief Justice Philomena Mwilu, Lady Justice Njoki Ndung’u, Justice Wajala, Justice Lenaola and Justice Ouko.
The court says Sonko did not adhere to the rules which dictate that petitioners should file both electronic and printed versions, with the same consistency.
The courts have also established that the former county boss filed a notice of appeal on March 8, four days after the Court of Appeal verdict. He then filed the petition on April 4, the last day he had to do so.
According to the court’s findings, he failed to the printed copy and was asked by the Supreme Court to do so on May 18. He filed the printed copy two days later.
“In the present case, while the appellant sat on the printed copy for more than one month, once directed to file the same, he did so within 2 days and thereafter served the respondents,” the judges said.
