Kenyans warned against sponsored social media attacks on Supreme Court judges
Kenyans have been warned to desist from sponsoring and executing attacks on social media regarding the Supreme Court’s judgment on the presidential petition.
Through a statement, the Judiciary said that some of the attacks, funded by political operatives and other interested parties, have been aimed at the Supreme Court as a result of the September 5 ruling, which upheld the election of William Ruto as president-elect in the General Election.
According to the Judiciary, it executed its mandate in accordance with the Constitution.
“The persons sponsoring and executing the attacks on social media to disparage the Court are advised to desist forthwith,” the statement reads.
Additionally, the Judiciary said that no Judge of the Supreme Court has written a resignation letter, as claimed in a section of media.
“No Judge of the Supreme Court has written a resignation letter, as claimed in a section of media, because there is no reason to do so. The Court is working in harmony as a cohesive unit,” the Judiciary’s statement read in part.
“There has been an unfortunate trend of isolating individual judges and attributing the judgment to them. The Court has seven judges who are independent and highly respectful of each other as equals. A ‘Unanimous’ judgment is a collective decision made by the Court and not by an individual,” it added.
It has further urged Kenyans to be patient, as the Supreme Court will provide the full judgment of the Presidential petition in due time.
“There is a legal provision of 21 days following the reading of the short version of the judgment to do so. Kenyans are therefore requested to exercise patience as they await the full judgment which will shed light and provide clarity on the grounds and rationale of the Court,” it said.
This comes after Siaya governor, James Orengo said that the Supreme Court’s verdict that upheld Ruto as president-elect was not a judicial judgement.
Orengo said that the court, led by Chief Justice Martha Koome had brought shame to those who fought for the independence of the judiciary in the country.
“Chief Justice Koome you have brought shame to the Judiciary by rendering a judgement that in the eyes of the ordinary people who fought for you to make sure that the judicial system has independence,” Orengo said.
“The person who wrote that judgement has done a great injustice to the rule of law. I respect the court, and I have practiced law for a very long time. A lot of the judges in the Supreme Court are my juniors,” he added.
He cited that the language used by the seven judges to render the judgement as inappropriate and unfortunate as the judgement was politically based and not judicial.
He compared the judicial process to a football match that he said should be governed by rules of the game.
“When reading a judgment, the judges use words that are measured so that even the losers in a court of law feel that justice has been done. Like in a football match, if the referee is fair, the competing sides will congratulate each other and shake hands. That’s how courts are supposed to work,” said Orengo.
