The Supreme Court has directed Attorney General Justin Muturi and a tribunal that recommended the sacking of Justice Juma Chitembwe to respond to his appeal within 14 days.
The apex court’s Registrar Bernard Kasavuli on Monday, March 7, 2023, also directed suspended judge Chitembwe to complete filling his appeal documents and exhibits by close of business Tuesday, March 7, 2023.
Kasavuli issued directives after Chitembwe’s lawyer Peter Wena sought more time to enable him to complete uploading the entire record of appeal in the Judiciary electronic portal.
“The documents are voluminous so far we have six volumes of documents, pictures, and videos that are yet to be uploaded to the e-portal. We seek to be granted time to complete the process,” pleaded Wena.
Kasavuli ordered the case to be mentioned on March 27, 2023 to confirm compliance on the filling of responses by the AG and the Tribunal and allocation of the matter to the judges appointed by either the Chief Justice or her deputy.
Justice Chitembwe in his appeal wants the decision by a 12-member tribunal led by Justice Mumbi Ngugi set aside by the apex court and for him to be allowed to resume duty.
He says he is dissatisfied with the entire findings of the tribunal as it erred in law when it recommended that he be removed from office after being found guilty of four allegations of misconduct.
He further challenges the tribunal’s decision to hold some of the evidence recorded by former Nairobi Governor Mike Sonko’s aide-Francis Wambua Kivuva as inadmissible for having been obtained in a deliberate scheme of entrapping him.
The judge adds that Sonko was on a revenge mission against him as he was a member of the three-judge bench that dismissed the consolidated petitions regarding his impeachment.
He says the video and audio clips were modified or edited by Sonko who also coached the parties in the video recordings prior to the recordings.
Sonko had exposed the judge in an amateur video, receiving a bag full of money from a female lawyer for the purpose of defeating justice.
“None of the video and audio recordings were done by law enforcement officers and they were therefore inadmissible,” Chitembwe says in his affidavits filed at the court.
The recordings, he maintains, were made in violation of his right to privacy.
Chitembwe found guilty
The 12-member tribunal unanimously recommended to President William Ruto to remove him from the Judiciary after being found guilty of four out of six misconduct allegations leveled against him by his employer the Judicial Service Commission.
He was found guilty of acquiring a proprietary interest in a land parcel in Kindono, Kwale county, which was the subject of a succession case pending before him.
Chitembwe is said to have breached the Judicial Service Code of conduct for judges.
“There is sufficient evidence to prove that the judge acquired an interest over land parcel No.Kwale/Galu Kinondo/779 through his relative and proxy Amana Saidi Jirani,” said the tribunal in its findings.
In the second charge, he was found guilty of discussing the withdrawal of a case at the Court of Appeal in Malindi at his residential home in Mountain View, Waiyaki Way, Nairobi with Jane Mutulu Kyengo, Sonko, Jimmy Askar, Amana Saidi Jirani among others.
The case was between Pacific Frontiers Seas Limited and Kyengo.
During the meeting, they discussed the sale of the land in Kinondo, Kwale for his personal benefit and the withdrawal of an appeal challenging his verdict on the property. The appeal had been filed against his own judgment.
“The judge grossly misconducted himself by advising the parties on the procedure to be followed to have an appeal which was filed against his own judgment withdrawn and promising to discuss the matter with other judges and judicial officers who were handling the said appeal,” said the tribunal.
Thirdly, the judge grossly misconducted himself by presiding over a bench in the impeachment case whilst being known and closely associated with Sonko, one of the petitioners in the matter.
Fourthly, Justice Chitembwe held a meeting with Sonko during which he offered legal advice on the viability of an appeal and the proposed grounds of appeal against the judgment that upheld his impeachment.
