[2016] KESC 10 (KLR)
The Supreme Court held that the Judges and Magistrates Vetting Board was entitled to proceed with the vetting of the respondent, as the process had commenced before December 31, 2015. The Court emphasized that the respondent must be accorded full rights to a fair hearing and review, and that the vetting process...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2016] KESC 10 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Judges and Magistrates Vetting Board; Respondent: Nicholas Randa Owano Ombija
- Court
- Supreme Court
- Court Station
- Supreme Court of Kenya
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Petition 1 of 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Petition / Order on Petition After Appeal
- Outcome
- Petition allowed with specific directions for the vetting process to proceed and conclude within a set timeframe; each party to bear its own costs.
- Judges
- WM Mutunga, KH Rawal, MK Ibrahim, JB Ojwang, SC Wanjala, N Ndungu
- Legal Topics
- Judicial Vetting, Right to Fair Hearing, Retrospective Application, Judicial Review
- 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
Judges and Magistrates Vetting Board
Applicant
Nicholas Randa Owano Ombija
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Petition / Order on Petition After Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Judges and Magistrates Vetting Board could proceed with the vetting of the respondent after annulment of its earlier decision.
- 2 Whether the respondent was entitled to a fair hearing and right of review in the resumed vetting process.
- 3 Whether the vetting process should be limited to matters arising up to August 27, 2010.
Ratio Decidendi
The Supreme Court held that the Judges and Magistrates Vetting Board was entitled to proceed with the vetting of the respondent, as the process had commenced before December 31, 2015. The Court emphasized that the respondent must be accorded full rights to a fair hearing and review, and that the vetting process should be conducted on a day-to-day basis until conclusion by March 31, 2016. The Court further clarified that the vetting is limited to matters arising up to August 27, 2010, in accordance with established precedents. By annulling its previous decision of December 21, 2012, the Board and the parties revert to the legal position as at July 30, 2012. Each party was ordered to bear...
Court Disposition
Petition allowed with specific directions for the vetting process to proceed and conclude within a set timeframe; each party to bear its own costs.
Orders
- The Petition is allowed on specified terms.
- The vetting process by the Petitioner had commenced before December 31, 2015.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
19 paragraphs
Judges and Magistrates Vetting Board v Ombija (Petition 1 of 2016) [2016] KESC 10 (KLR) (Civ) (7 March 2016) (Order)
Judges and Magistrates Vetting Board v Nicholas Randa Owano Ombija [2016] eKLR
Neutral citation: [2016] KESC 10 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Supreme Court of Kenya
Civil
Petition 1 of 2016
WM Mutunga, CJ, KH Rawal, DCJ & VP, MK Ibrahim, JB Ojwang, SC Wanjala & N Ndungu, SCJJ
March 7, 2016
Between
The Judges and Magistrates Vetting Board
Petitioner
and
Nicholas Randa Owano Ombija
Respondent
(An appeal from the Judgment of the Court of Appeal in Nairobi Civil Appeal N0. 281 of 2015 (Kariuki, Sichale and Mohammed, JJA) dated and delivered on14th December 2015 Civil Appeal 281 of 2015 )
Order
Orders of the Court 1. Upon considering all the documents tendered by the parties, as well as the detailed submissions of learned counsel, we have formulated a Judgment that will be issued on notice, but the specific Orders of which we now issue, as follows:(1)The Petition is allowed, on the following specific terms.(2)The process of vetting by the Petitioner had commenced before December 31, 2015. (3)The Petitioner shall proceed with the process of hearing, and shall conclude the vetting of the Respondent without any further delay.(4)To accord the respondent full opportunity to partake of his rights to a fair hearing, as well as his right of review, the vetting shall proceed on a day-to-day basis, until concluded by March 31, 2016, in accordance with the law.(5)As established in the precedents of this Court, the vetting process shall be limited to matters arising upto August 27, 2010. (6)As the petitioner had annulled its decision of December 21, 2012 and the proceedings leading thereto, the parties legally revert to the position prevailing as at July 30, 2012. (7)The parties shall bear their respective costs, in respect of the appeal herein.Orders accordingly.
DATED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI THIS 7TH DAY OF MARCH, 2016. ................................................W.M. MUTUNGACHIEF JUSTICE & PRESIDENT OF THE SUPREME COURT................................................K.H. RAWALDEPUTY CHIEF JUSTICE & VICE-PRESIDENT OF THE SUPREME COURT................................................M.K. IBRAHIMJUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT................................................J.B. OJWANGJUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT................................................S.C. WANJALAJUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT................................................S.N. NDUNGUJUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURTI certify that this is a true copy of the originalREGISTRAR, SUPREME COURT