[2016] KEHC 1082 (KLR)
The court held that the petitioner's challenge to his conviction and sentencing was not properly brought as a judicial review proceeding because the decision in question was a judicial, not administrative or quasi-judicial, act. The petitioner failed to demonstrate any violation or infringement of constitutional...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2016] KEHC 1082 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Antony Mwakatini Mwaisaka; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Voi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Petition 164 of 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Constitutional Petition / Judgment
- Outcome
- petition dismissed
- Judges
- CM Kamau
- Legal Topics
- Judicial Review, Right to Fair Trial, Procedural Fairness
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Antony Mwakatini Mwaisaka
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the petitioner's challenge to his conviction and sentencing is properly brought as a judicial review proceeding.
- 2 Whether the petitioner has demonstrated a violation or infringement of a right or fundamental freedom under the Constitution.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the petitioner's challenge to his conviction and sentencing was not properly brought as a judicial review proceeding because the decision in question was a judicial, not administrative or quasi-judicial, act. The petitioner failed to demonstrate any violation or infringement of constitutional rights as required under Article 23 of the Constitution. The court emphasized that judicial review is not the appropriate remedy for challenging the sufficiency of evidence or the merits of a judicial decision; such challenges should be pursued through appeal or revision. Consequently, the petition lacked merit and was dismissed, with the court advising the petitioner to seek...
Court Disposition
petition dismissed
Orders
- The petition lodged on 18th November 2016 is dismissed.
- The petitioner is at liberty to seek redress from the High Court of Kenya by following the correct procedure.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT VOI
PETITION NO 164 OF 2016
ANTONY MWAKATINI MWAISAKA……………………………………PETITIONER
VERSUS
REPUBLIC……………………………………………………………………RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT
1. I have endeavoured to explain to the Petitioner, Antony Mwakatini Mwaisaka the difference between a Judicial Review, a Revision and an Appeal but he is still adamant that he wishes to proceed with the Judicial Review.
2. Having listened to him and as was rightly stated by Miss Anyumba, counsel for the State, it is clear that the Petitioner is challenging the sufficiency of the evidence that was adduced against him leading to his conviction and sentencing. The decision was made by a judicial officer. It was not a quasi-judicial or administrative decision that would need to be quashed in Judicial Review proceedings. If the Petitioner was not satisfied with the decision of the Trial Court, he ought to approach this court in a proper manner.
3. I have carefully considered his Petition that was lodged on 18th November 2016 and brought under the provisions of Article 23(1) (3) (f) of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010 and note that he has not demonstrated that there was a violation or infringement of, or threat to, a right or fundamental freedom in the Bill of Rights.
4. In fact, he has sought that he be granted leave to file a Judicial Review which leave does not need to be sought.
5. Accordingly, having heard the Petitioner and counsel for the State, I find no merit in the Petition that was lodged on 18th November 2016 and hereby dismiss the same.
6. The Petitioner is at liberty to seek redress from the High Court of Kenya by following the correct procedure. I strongly recommend that the Petitioner seeks legal counsel on his intentions to approach the High Court of Kenya to ensure that he is not denied access to courts due to ignorance of the Law.
7. It is so ordered.
DATED and DELIVERED at VOI this 1stday of December2016
J. KAMAU
JUDGE
In the presence of:-
Miss Anyumba……………………………………... for Respondent
Antony Mwakatini Mwaisaka……………..……….Petitioner
Josephat Mavu– Court Clerk