NAIROBI, Kenya – A heated courtroom exchange unfolded on Wednesday as lawyers Nelson Havi and Ahmednasir Abdullahi clashed with High Court Judge Lawrence Mugambi over the handling of a case seeking the removal of Chief Justice Martha Koome and Supreme Court judges.
The two lawyers—who are among the petitioners seeking Koome’s ouster—strongly objected to the judge’s decision to set a hearing for an application requesting the formation of a bench to handle the petitions.
Judge Mugambi had earlier extended orders barring the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) from hearing the petitions and directed that the request for a bench be heard on March 28.
But his ruling was met with immediate resistance.
Havi dismissed the ruling outright, declaring, “This is a circus, Your Honour. We reject these orders.”
Ahmednasir, on his part, accused the court of deliberately stalling the case.
The two contended that the matter should be dismissed outright, arguing that empaneling a bench is the sole responsibility of the Chief Justice—who, in this case, is a party to the proceedings.
“It would be impractical for the Chief Justice to appoint a bench to hear a case in which she is directly involved,” they argued.
However, Judge Mugambi stood firm, maintaining that the issue had been presented as an interlocutory matter that the court was obligated to address.
“This is an application that has been made before the court. How else do I deal with it?” he posed.
As tensions escalated, lawyer Ochieng Oduol sought to de-escalate the situation, urging a more measured approach.
“Let us deal with this matter in a civil way,” Oduol pleaded.
But Havi remained combative, retorting, “We can also deal with it in an uncivil way because the court is making it difficult to pursue this matter legally.”
Both Havi and Ahmednasir are part of a group pushing for the removal of Chief Justice Koome and her Supreme Court colleagues, accusing them of incompetence and misconduct.
Judge Mugambi directed that the application be served within three days, with responses to be filed three days thereafter.
The matter is now set for hearing on March 28, where all parties will highlight their submissions before the court makes a determination.
