Casualties of judiciary reforms

BY WAHOME THUKU

A Supreme Court judge seen as a rising star in the Judiciary has become the highest profile casualty of the vetting.

Praised as impartial and immune to corruption, Justice Mohammed Ibrahim was dropped for having an overflowing in-tray of cases after a last-minute attempt to save his job failed.

Also brought down Friday by the Vetting of Judges and Magistrates Board was yet another Court of Appeal judge. Four appellate court judges sacked in April also learned that the decisions to remove them would not be reviewed.

Supreme Court judge Ibrahim and appellate judge Roselyn Nambuye were both kicked out Friday, less than a year after their promotion to their positions. The vetting board cited delays in delivering more than 270 judgements and rulings as the reason they lost their jobs. The delays, the board said, had led to loss of public confidence in the Judiciary, which has a backlog of cases.

The vetting board also dismissed applications to review its decisions on four Court of Appeal judges sacked in April, after being found “unsuitable to serve as judges”.

Justices Riaga Omolo, Samuel Bosire, Emmanuel O’Kubasu, and Joseph Nyamu had contested their removal and applied for review of the determination.

The dismissal with finality of their applications means the four stand retired, as the vetting board’s decisions cannot be challenged in court. It also clears the way for the Judicial Service Commission to fill the vacant positions. The Constitution requires that the Court of Appeal have a minimum of 12 judges.

Justice Ibrahim was the first to be sent home Friday morning over delays in delivering 264 rulings and judgements. Some date back nine years. The vetting board appreciated his strengths as a judge, but explained the backlog of cases was unacceptable because it was an obstacle to swift justice.

“The finding of unsuitability was not based on even a hint of corruption or on considerations of lack of impartiality,” said vetting board chairman Sharad Rao.

 “By all accounts he has shown himself to be a sensitive, warm, intelligent, and fair-minded judge… The delays (in the 264 cases, however,) were unacceptable, carried like a hump on a camel’s back from one post to the next. Hundreds of litigants felt robbed of their right to have their cases finally determined.”

The sacking of Ibrahim dealt a second blow to the Supreme Court following the suspension of Deputy CJ Nancy Baraza. The court now has five judges, which is the minimum allowed by the Constitution to constitute a Bench to hear cases.

Another Supreme Court judge, Jackton B Ojwang, survived after the board established his delays were due to ill health. But Justice Ojwang, who also rose to the Supreme Court last year, cleared his backlog. At the time of the appointment he had 145 rulings and judgements pending on his desk in Mombasa. This was attributed to long illness, which forced him to travel to Nairobi regularly for treatment. When he regained his health he cleared the cases and had no outstanding matters when he went before the board.

“The judge came through the board as an intellectual of high calibre, and dedicated to his work as a judge,” the chairman said, declaring him fit to continue serving.

For Nambuye, Friday’s decision means the end of a 32-year career in the Judiciary, since her appointment as a district magistrate in 1980. Nambuye had survived the ‘radical surgery’ of 2003, as well as a grilling by the JSC for the Court of Appeal job last year. But it was not a case of third time lucky for her. She was done in by about 16 complaints of delaying cases for years.

The vetting board attributed the delays to poor time management. Nambuye loses her job just months after the retirement of her husband, Justice Daniel Aganyanya.

The two had been suspended in 2003 over allegations of incompetence and corruption while serving at the High Court. Both were cleared and reinstated, then promoted to the Court of Appeal at different times. Aganyanya, who is physically handicapped, retired in January.

The board is only vetting judges and magistrates who were in office before the promulgation of the Constitution in August 2010.

It has so far interviewed the three elevated to the Supreme Court and seven promoted from High Court to the Court of Appeal. The announcements Friday were delayed by an hour for the board to serve the judges with the determinations before going public.

In April, some of the judges got news of their sacking, as they were presiding over cases in court, leading to protests from the Judiciary.
The board found other appeal judges Kihara Kariuki and Hannah Okwengu suitable to continue serving.

It, however, did not give a determination on the fate of their colleagues Kalpana Rawal, Martha Koome, and David Maraga, who are involved in a case seeking determination of the elections date. Rao said it would not be in public interest to determine their vetting before they had concluded the case.

Another judge, Wanjiru Karanja, was interviewed on Friday and the board had not made a determination on her. The board also interviewed the first sitting High Court judge Jessie Lessit on Monday.