Judges and magistrates have backed cases filed by their seven colleagues at the Supreme Court who have sued the Judicial Service Commission over petitions filed to remove them from office. Through their umbrella body, Kenya Magistrates and Judges Association (KMJA) argued that Chief Justice Martha Koome, her deputy Philomena Mwilu and Justices Mohamed Ibrahim, Smokin Wanjala, Njoki Ndung'u, Isaac Lenaola and William Ouko have a right to approach the High Court to fight for their rights. The association argued that judges are human beings just as anyone else, adding that they do not surrender their human rights whenever they take an oath of office. "To do so would set a dangerous precedent that erodes constitutional protections and undermines the rule of law.
Judges, like all citizens, have constitutional rights that are not surrendered upon taking judicial office It is settled that there is no constitutional violation that the Constitution of Kenya 2010 is incapable of remedying," KMJA stated Pointing out, "The Constitution allows the petitioner herein to approach the court whenever any of his rights are infringed upon and/or when threatened with violation" The Justice Stephen Radido led the association in its submissions, argued that lawyer Nelson Have is wrong to say that the High Court does not have the power to entertain or hear cases emanating from petitions for removal of a judge.
KMJA said would be unfair for a judge or magistrate to be forced by the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) to participate in an illegal process without the court's intervention. " Your Lordship, in the premises, we submit that if the process of removal is unconstitutional, wrong, un-procedural or illegal, it cannot lie for the second innterested party (Havi) herein to say that this court has no jurisdiction to address the grievances raised by the petitioner," KMJA's submissions filed by Kiragu Wathuta advocates read in part.
At the same time, KMJA supported a prayer by Justice Lenaola to have an uneven number of judges hear the case. The association said that the seven judges' cases raised novel issues of public interest that needed more than one judge to solve.
