The High Court has prioritised former Nairobi Governor Mike Sonko’s petition challenging judgments that upheld his impeachment. Justice Gregory Mutai directed the court to determine the petition at the earliest opportunity.
Sonko wants the court to overturn decisions that upheld his removal from office. He argues that misconduct findings against former judge Said Juma Chitembwe raise concerns about the fairness of his case.
Sonko Challenges Previous Court Decisions
The Nairobi County Assembly impeached Sonko in December 2020. The Senate subsequently upheld his removal from office.
In June 2021, a three-judge High Court bench dismissed petitions challenging the impeachment. Chitembwe served on that bench.
The Court of Appeal later upheld the decision. The Supreme Court also rejected Sonko’s challenge, bringing the impeachment dispute through Kenya’s highest courts.
However, Sonko has now returned to court with a fresh petition. He argues that Chitembwe’s conduct undermines the credibility of the original proceedings.
Chitembwe’s Misconduct Findings
The Supreme Court upheld a tribunal’s recommendation to remove Chitembwe from judicial service over misconduct. Sonko’s legal team relies on those findings to challenge the judgments that upheld his impeachment.
His lawyers want the court to declare the original High Court judgment and subsequent appellate decisions null and void. They argue that the misconduct raises questions about judicial impartiality and the right to a fair hearing.
However, the court must examine Sonko’s arguments before deciding whether the findings justify reopening the case. The High Court’s latest direction prioritises the petition. It does not overturn the existing judgments or guarantee Sonko’s success.
Other Legal Battles Continue
Sonko also faces separate legal proceedings over alleged corruption. In another development, Chief Justice Martha Koome authorised Environment and Land Court Judge Charles Ondieki to conclude Sonko’s corruption trial.
The decision followed a request from Sonko’s defence team. His lawyers wanted to avoid restarting the prolonged case before a new judicial officer.
Meanwhile, Sonko continues to pursue legal avenues related to his impeachment. The latest petition could test how courts handle earlier judgments when allegations of judicial misconduct emerge.
The court’s eventual decision will determine whether Sonko’s arguments justify further legal action against the rulings that upheld his removal.
