Supreme Court softens stance on Ahmednasir, hints at possible reconsideration
Chief Justice Martha Koome and the Supreme Court appear to be yielding to pressure from Senior Counsel Ahmednasir Abdullahi and others within the legal fraternity to reconsider their decision to deny him an audience
Chief Justice Martha Koome and the Supreme Court appear to be yielding to pressure from Senior Counsel Ahmednasir Abdullahi and others within the legal fraternity to reconsider their decision to deny him an audience.
After Supreme Court judge Smokin Wanjala certified an application urging the court to review its decision against Ahmednasir as urgent, Koome has given directions that may pave the way for renewed engagements between the Supreme Court and Ahmednasir.
Koome has issued orders suggesting a possible opportunity for Ahmednasir to appear before the apex court, which could amount to a victory against the bench.
After Supreme Court judge Smokin Wanjala certified an application urging the court to review its decision against Ahmednasir as urgent, Koome has given directions that may pave the way for renewed engagements between the Supreme Court and Ahmednasir.
Lawyer Julius Mirii filed a notice of motion before the apex court on January 22, urging it to review and set aside its decision to recuse itself from Ahmednasir and all 13 lawyers working at his law firm.
The Chief Justice has now issued orders that may facilitate Ahmednasir’s return.
“That the respondents (including Ahmednasir) do file and serve their responses and written submissions within five (5) days of service of the applicant. That the applicant do file and serve their rejoinder (if any) within three days of service by the respondents,” directed Ms Koome.
“That the matter be mentioned before the Registrar/Deputy Registrar on February 17, 2025 to confirm compliance. All documents must be filed both electronically and physically.”
Mirii has listed the Registrar of the Judiciary as the respondent alongside Ahmednasir and 13 others.
The lawyer seeks a review of the Supreme Court’s decision made on January 23, 2024, which recused itself from Ahmednasir and his 13 colleagues, or at the very least, a reconsideration in favour of the 13 lawyers.
Al-Shabaab demands Sh7m ransom for kidnapped chiefs
Petition filed against nomination of Ruto’s Advisor, Adams Oloo to IEBC selection panel
Judiciary tells off Ombudsman over continued attacks
Family of missing Nakuru fisherman Brian Odhiambo breaks down after court dismisses case
EPRA responds over quality of fuel in the Kenyan market after viral video
“…Henceforth, Ahmednasir Abdullahi shall have no audience before the court, either himself, through an employee of his law firm, or any other person holding his brief or acting pursuant to his (Ahmednasir’s) instructions,” the Supreme Court ruling states.
Mirii argues that the decision to deny audience to all 13 lawyers from Ahmednasir’s law firm is disproportionate to Ahmednasir’s alleged misconduct and unfairly impacts clients who may have little to do with him.
He further contends that the Supreme Court has general powers to review its own decisions in exceptional circumstances to ensure justice is served.
“The recusal decision, unlike a merit decision, is an exception to the general rule of functus officio. This is why parties can always renew a recusal application where there are exceptional circumstances, as determined by the court itself,” states Mirii in his application.
He adds that the application also seeks to correct the misconception and misunderstanding among the general public that the court intended to penalise lawyers at Ahmednasir’s firm.
Counties paid Sh15.8bn to ghost workers, Controller of Budget reveals
Why TikTok deleted over 300,000 videos in Kenya
Government admits it may not achieve its target of building affordable housing units
Top UDA officials in Uganda to meet Museveni
EACC reveals Ksh1.4B graft scandal after arrest of Bomet Governor Hillary Barchok
You can’t teach me, I have a PhD; Ruto tells off critics questioning his policies
Follow us
