Supreme Court wants Sonko case against its judgment dismissed
Former Nairobi Governor Mike Mbuvi Sonko.
The Supreme Court wants a petition against it instituted by former Nairobi Governor Mike Sonko dismissed, saying the High Court has no jurisdiction to hear it.
In his petition at the High Court in Mombasa, Mr Sonko wants a declaration that his case at the Supreme Court, where he was challenging his impeachment as Nairobi governor, be heard afresh.
The Supreme Court says that the jurisdiction of the High Court was erroneously invoked and thus the petition was not properly before it (High Court).
“The petition is an ill-advised attempt to invite this court to review the decision of the Supreme Court, which (attempt) is not procedural and improper,” argues the Supreme Court in its submissions. Through Muma&Kanjama Advocates, the apex court says that the High Court ought to resist Mr Sonko’s attempt to revive and litigate matters it conclusively dealt with.
“The High Court is precluded from exercising jurisdiction in respect of matters reserved for the exclusive jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under the constitution,” part of the submissions state.
In his petition against the Supreme Court, Mr Sonko also wants a declaration that his rights to a fair trial was infringed in his petition at the Supreme Court and that his political rights were violated by failure to accord him a fair hearing. He also wants an award of Sh35 million for loss of campaign fund contributions and damages amounting to Sh15 million for breach of the right to be heard.
According to Mr Sonko, the Supreme Court case was premised on a petition of appeal that was served on all the respondents with expectations that responses and rejoinders would be filed before submissions.
“On July 11 2022 the Supreme Court gave arbitrary directions that omitted the filing of submissions by the petitioner and also denied him the right to a rejoinder,” argues Mr Sonko. He further argues that he was compelled to proceed with the hearing despite not being accorded time to draft, file and serve a rejoinder on the response he had received.
The case will be heard on March 15.
