[2021] KESC 40 (KLR)
The Supreme Court, noting the proximity of the scheduled hearing of the main appeal and the need to conserve judicial resources, declined to hear the Notice of Motion for stay of execution separately. Instead, it directed that the application be taken out of the hearing list and be considered together with the main...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] KESC 40 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Director Of Public Prosecutions; Respondent: Chrysanthus Barnabus Okemo; Respondent: Samuel Kimunchu Gichuru; Respondent: Attorney General; Respondent: Chief Magistrates’ Court; Respondent: Ethics And Anti-Corruption Commission
- Court
- Supreme Court
- Court Station
- Supreme Court of Kenya
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Application 22 of 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Directions on Interlocutory Application
- Outcome
- Application for stay of execution not determined; directions issued to consolidate with main appeal.
- Judges
- MK Koome, MK Ibrahim, SC Wanjala, NS Ndungu, W Ouko
- Legal Topics
- Extradition Proceedings, Powers of Attorney General, Stay of Execution, Jurisdiction of Magistrates Court
- 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
Director Of Public Prosecutions
Applicant
Chrysanthus Barnabus Okemo
Respondent
Samuel Kimunchu Gichuru
Respondent
Attorney General
Respondent
Chief Magistrates’ Court
Respondent
Ethics And Anti-Corruption Commission
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Directions on Interlocutory Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Director of Public Prosecutions had authority to institute extradition proceedings without the Attorney General.
- 2 Whether a stay of execution of the Court of Appeal decision should be granted pending appeal.
Ratio Decidendi
The Supreme Court, noting the proximity of the scheduled hearing of the main appeal and the need to conserve judicial resources, declined to hear the Notice of Motion for stay of execution separately. Instead, it directed that the application be taken out of the hearing list and be considered together with the main appeal. The Court made no orders as to costs, effectively deferring any interim relief and consolidating the interlocutory application with the substantive appeal for efficiency and comprehensive adjudication.
Court Disposition
Application for stay of execution not determined; directions issued to consolidate with main appeal.
Orders
- The Notice of Motion dated 12th August, 2020 is taken out of the hearing list.
- The Notice of Motion to be listed for further directions during the hearing of Petition No. 14 of 2020 on 5th October, 2021.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
27 paragraphs
Director of Public Prosecutions v Okemo & 4 others (Miscellaneous Application 22 of 2020) [2021] KESC 40 (KLR) (6 August 2021) (Directions)
Director of Public Prosecutions v Chrysanthus Barnabus Okemo & 4 others [2021] eKLR
Neutral citation: [2021] KESC 40 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Supreme Court of Kenya
Miscellaneous Application 22 of 2020
MK Koome, CJ & P, MK Ibrahim, SC Wanjala, NS Ndungu & W Ouko, SCJJ
August 6, 2021
Between
Director Of Public Prosecutions
Applicant
and
Chrysanthus Barnabus Okemo
1st Respondent
Samuel Kimunchu Gichuru
2nd Respondent
Attorney General
3rd Respondent
Chief Magistrates’ Court
4th Respondent
Ethics And Anti-Corruption Commission
5th Respondent
Directions
1. Intending to challenge the decision of the Court of Appeal made on 2nd March, 2018, the Director of Public Prosecutions, (the applicant) has, with the Court’s leave, lodged Petition of Appeal No. 14 of 2020. It was declared by that decision that extradition proceedings instituted before the magistrate’s court against Chrysanthus Barnabus Okemo and Samuel Kimunchu Gichuru (the 1st and 2nd respondents) by the applicant were without the authority of the 3rd Respondent (the Attorney General) and therefore a nullity; and that, in law, it is only the latter who is vested with the power to commence and conduct such proceedings.
2. Aggrieved by that determination and apprehensive that the decision may be executed by the Attorney General before the appeal is heard, the applicant has taken out this Notice of Motion, praying that, pending the hearing and determination of the appeal, this Court be pleased to issue an order to stay the execution of the aforesaid decision of the Court Appeal.
3. The application was listed for consideration on the basis of written submissions pursuant to Rule 31 of the Court’s Rules. However, having regard to the nature of the dispute in the pending appeal; bearing in mind that the main appeal has now been listed for hearing on 5th October, 2021, and in order to save on judicial resources, we direct that;i.The Notice of Motion dated 12th August, 2020 be and is hereby taken out of the hearing list;ii.The Notice of Motion be listed for further directions during the hearing of Petition No. 14 of 2020 on 5th October, 2021;iii.We make no orders as to costs.
DATED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI THIS 6TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2021. ........................M.K. KOOMECHIEF JUSTICE & PRESIDENT OF THE SUPREME COURT...........................M.K. IBRAHIMJUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT...........................S.C. WANJALAJUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT..............................NJOKI NDUNGUJUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT.................W. OUKOJUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURTI certify that this is a true copy of the originalREGISTRARSUPREME COURT OF KENYA