The Court of Appeal on Tuesday, November 12, 2024, suspended High Court proceedings concerning the indefinite ban imposed by the Supreme Court on lawyer Ahmednasir Abdullahi and his associates.
The three-judge bench composed of Pauline Nyamweya, Aggrey Muchelule and George Odunga ruled that the case would remain suspended until an appeal filed by the Supreme Court was heard and determined.
They moved to the appellate court after High Court Judge Chacha Mwita said it has jurisdiction to hear and determine the case filed by the Law Society of Kenya challenging Ahmednasir’s ban on January 18 this year.
Ahmednasir, a prominent Kenyan lawyer, has been involved in various high-profile cases and has often been at the centre of legal controversies.
A collage of Chief Justice Martha Koome (right) and Senior Counsel Ahmednasir Abdullahi (right)
Photo
The Judiciary
Issuing the verdict, the three-judge bench noted the court is bound to determine whether the lawyer’s rights were infringed upon in any way.
The Supreme Court, which is the highest Court in the land, had issued orders permanently barring the prominent lawyer from making submissions before it.
In the suit lodged at the Milimani Law Courts, LSK argued the decision by the Apex Court was punitive, unfair, and unreasonable.
The nature of this ban and its implications for his practice raised questions about judicial accountability and the extent to which judges can be held liable for their decisions.
The ban was issued by the full bench of the Apex Court citing Ahmednassir’s involvement in campaigns in mainstream and social media attacking the court’s decisions.
Further, the Supreme Court observed the decision to bar the lawyer from appearing before it was reached on account of the lawyer’s allegations which were aimed at tarnishing individual judges’ reputation.
This suspension is primarily to address a significant legal question: whether judges of the Supreme Court can be sued in the High Court.
Judges typically enjoy a degree of immunity from lawsuits related to their judicial functions. This principle is designed to protect judicial independence and ensure that judges can make decisions without fear of personal repercussions.
File image of a gavel on the bench in the courtroom
File
