Reprieve for Uhuru camp as court stops removal of Murathe, Kioni from Jubilee Party
Jeremiah Kioni (right) and David Murathe.
The High Court has suspended the removal of Jeremiah Kioni, David Murathe and Kagwe Gichohi as officials of Jubilee Party and subsequent expulsion from the party.
Justice Asenath Ongeri also suspended a special of the Kenya Gazette issued by the Registrar of Political Parties on July 12, notifying the public of the intended changes in the party leadership.
The special notice indicated the removal of Mr Kioni, Mr Murathe and Gichohi as secretary general, vice chairman and treasurer, respectively.
The officials rushed to court saying they are apprehensive that they suffered grave injustice in the process of their removal in violation of their constitutionally guaranteed right to fair hearing.
“In the meantime, conservatory orders are granted in terms of prayers 1, 2, 3 and 4 of the application dated 12/7/2023,” the judge said.
Through lawyer Jackson Awele, the three said the Political Parties Disputes Tribunal (PPDT) delivered a decision on July 10, dismissing an application seeking to stop their removal as officials of the party, by a slim majority of 4:3 members.
He said that curiously, barely hours after the judgement was issued the Registrar of Political Parties hurriedly issued a special issue of the Kenya Gazette notifying the public of the intended change in the leadership of the Party.
The lawyer said Mr Kanini Kega as the new secretary general hurriedly issued notices seeking to convene the National Delegates Convention to conduct national elections for the offices they held.
“Bearing in mind that the changes contemplated by these notices form the gravamen of the appeal, it is only fair and just that the conservatory orders sought be granted to preserve the substratum of the appeal,” Mr Awele submitted.
The lawyer said the coordinated fashion with which the notices were carried in the newspapers and the Kenya gazette barely hours after the judgment was delivered, provides more than a reasonable basis to warrant a retrial of the case.
He alleges that it came to the attention of the former officials that the judgment, which was scheduled for delivery on July 11 at 2.30pm was already circulating in the public domain at 8am.
“It is customary judicial practice that judgments are signed after delivery and that the same are kept in the confidential custody of judicial officers until after delivery. There is accordingly reasonable basis to believe that the judgement was released to some parties by the judicial officers who authored it,” he said.
He said the officials sought an explanation for the breach through a letter dated July 11, 2023 and that the PPDT owned up, on record, to the said leakage.
However, the tribunal allegedly declined to give the explanations sought on the premise that they will deal with the issue administratively and added that any dissatisfied party should appeal to the High Court.
The case will be heard on July 26 before Justice Aleem Visram.
