“Kenya School of Law Director, Prof PLO Lumumba has criticized a bid by a section of Supreme Court judges to seek extension of their term to 74 years. He said the constitution was clear that a judge shall serve up to the age of 70 and urged those who had attained that age to retire honorably” (Daily Nation, 2016).
Here you see more on the imposed scandal that are happening in the Supreme Court and the challenge of hiring a new judge, how they appropriately address the matter between themselves. This here is more on the matter, as things goes and goes! After the E-Mails, planned time in court and also a Petition to Court as well; this here will not stop until hopeful justice have prevailed!
On May 27, 2016, at 2:26 PM, Willy Mutunga wrote:
The CA (Court of Appeal) has decided.
I am told there are applications and appeals already filed.
I have instructed Hon Lucy Njora (Supreme Court Deputy Registrar) to place the applications before me for directions.
I will deal with the applications as a single judge.
Dr. Willy Mutunga, D.Jur,SC,EGH
Chief Justice/President, Supreme Court of Kenya
“The poor need Justice; others need the Law.” Professor Dani Nabudere
“The rich don’t need the law, they’ve got wealth and power. It’s the poor who need the law.” Albie Sachs.
“The Supreme Court of Kenya neither has friends nor enemies among Kenyans. All the Court cares for is Justice for and to all Kenyans.”
Judge Njoki’s reply
On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 3:32 PM, Njoki Ndungu wrote:
I saw your email very late. It would have been better if you had called on phone directly if you had directions for me. I assure you I have followed the provisions of our rules and Act strictly.
As duty Judge for today I already heard 2 certificate of urgency applications by Justices Rawal and Tunoi. I have already disposed of them, given interim orders and given dates for interparties hearing. I think that is in order.
On May 27, 2016, at 3:46 PM, Willy Mutunga wrote:
I counseled against copying the applicants in any mail coming from us!
I thought, given the history of this matter, you would have considered that those of us who are around could be involved in some brief conferencing. Even as a duty judge, isn’t there a standing guideline that after the files are given to judges is either the CJ or the DCJ who does the allocation?
I am surprised you suggest I should have called you? Did you think of calling me?!
From: Njoki Ndungu
Date: May 28, 2016 at 8:42:37 AM EAT
To: Willy Mutunga
Cc: Mohammed Ibrahim , jbojwang , swanjala
Subject: Re: The Decision of the CA
With utmost respect CJ, I do not understand your angry tone – which I find inappropriate – to me in this email, for the following reasons:
Here is more:
Also this one which is fake and which is real:
The one up top or the one in the bottum, which is real? Aye?
Enough for now., right? We shouldn’t need to ask what is the real age of Judge, they should be honest men walking around us. The ones that we trust as their judgement should be as they are the epitome of law abiding citizenship. Instead here we have seen of dozen documents and proof that there is a state of unlawfulness in the Supreme Court of Kenya, and it is not a good look! Peace.
Another Document on the matter as well:
“Tunoi Tribunal Sworn In Despite Controversy Over Rao Age” (Citizen Kenya TV, 2016).
The Judicial Service Commission has this afternoon received the report of the Special Committee set up on 27th January 2016 to inquire into the allegation of bribery against Hon Mr. Justice Phillip K. Tunoi.
The Commission has deliberated upon and adopted the report.
The Commission is satisfied that from the totality of the material and information presented before it there was inappropriate interaction and communication between the Hon. Mr. Justice Phillip K. Tunoi and agents of a litigant in a matter pending before the Supreme Court. This in the opinion of the Commission amounts to gross misconduct and misbehavior, sufficient to warrant the establishment of a tribunal to further investigate the matter.
Secondly, as to whether or not there is material to suggest that a bribe was given to the Hon. Mr. Justice Phillip K. Tunoi on 27.8.2014 in order to influence the decision in Supreme Court Election Petition No 18/2014 Evans Odhiambo Kidero & 4 Others -Vs- Ferdinand Waititu Ndungu & 4 others to favour the Petitioner, the Commission is satisfied that this is an issue that requires further investigation by the said tribunal.
Arising from the foregoing, the Commission is satisfied that a Prima Facie case of gross misconduct and misbehaviour has been disclosed against the Hon. Mr. Justice Phillip K. Tunoi.
The Judicial Service Commission shall therefore recommend to his Excellency the President that a tribunal be established to investigate the matter.
Dated at Nairobi this 5th day of February, 2016.
HON. DR. WILLY MUTUNGA, D.Jur, SC, EGH, SEGH
CHAIR, JUDICIAL SERVICE COMMISSION