Judiciary breaks silence on alleged resignation of Supreme Court judges

The Judiciary has denied reports doing rounds on social media alleging that some judges of the Supreme Court had resigned. Reports surfaced on social media on Sunday, September 11, that two judges of the apex court had stepped down from their roles following the recent Supreme Court judgement that upheld the election of Kenya Kwanza […]

Judiciary breaks silence on alleged resignation of Supreme Court judges

The Judiciary has denied reports doing rounds on social media alleging that some judges of the Supreme Court had resigned.

Reports surfaced on social media on Sunday, September 11, that two judges of the apex court had stepped down from their roles following the recent Supreme Court judgement that upheld the election of Kenya Kwanza Alliance leader William Ruto as Kenya’s fifth president.

But in a statement on Monday, the Judiciary dismissed the reports as fake, insisting that the ruling delivered on September 5, by a seven-judge bench led by Chief Justice Martha Koome was unanimous and there were no divisions as alleged.

“No Judge of the Supreme Court has written a resignation letter, as claimed in a section of media, because there is no reason to do so. The Court is working in harmony as a cohesive unit,” the statement reads in part.

Attack on judges

The Judiciary further condemned what it termed as sustained attacks on the members of the bench that dismissed the petition filed by Azimio la Umoja – One Kenya coalition presidential flag bearer Raila Odinga and six others.

“There has been an unfortunate trend of isolating individual judges and attributing the judgment to them. The Court has seven judges who are independent and highly respectful of each other as equals. A ‘unanimous’ judgment is a collective decision made by the Court and not by an individual.

“The persons sponsoring and executing the attacks on social media to disparage the Court are advised to desist forthwith.”

The court urged parties dissatisfied with the ruling to wait for the full judgement to understand better why Azimio’s case was thrown out.

“There is a legal provision of 21 days following the reading of the short version of the judgment to do so. Kenyans are therefore requested to exercise patience as they await the full judgment which will shed light and provide clarity on the grounds and rationale of the Court,” the Judiciary added.

The statement comes a day after Siaya Governor James Orengo, who was part of the legal team representing Raila and his running mate Martha Karua in court, accused the court of making a ‘political’ judgement.

“Chief Justice Koome you have brought shame to the Judiciary by rendering a judgement that in the eyes of the ordinary people who fought for you to make sure a Chief Justice can have independence,” Orengo lamented.

 “You have brought shame to the people of the Republic of Kenya!”

Taking issue with the judges’ statement that Azimio’s evidence was nothing but ‘hot air’, Senior Counsel Orengo claimed the language used by the judges was not ‘judicial’.

“The person who wrote that judgement has done a great injustice to the rule of law. I respect the court, and I have practised law for a very long time. A lot of the judges in the Supreme Court are my juniors,” he added.

“Judges speak in words that are measured so that even the loser in a court of law feels like justice has been done.

“Not even a baraza presided by a Chief would use the kind of language that was used at the Supreme Court. Shame to you judges!”