Justice Mutava (pictured left) is accused of barring Pattni’s prosecution/FILE
NAIROBI, Kenya, May 9 – Bernard Kalove who acted as businessman Kamlesh Pattni’s lawyer in a case in which he sought to stop his continued prosecution over the Goldenberg scam back in 2012 on Monday testified before the tribunal investigating Justice Joseph Mutava’s handling of the matter.
Kalove did not last very long on the stand however as he disputed the evidence presented by the Lead Assisting Counsel Nazima Malik in the matter.
Malik had sought to know why Kalove waited weeks before having Pattni’s application for judicial review certified as urgent.
According to the court file, Kalove acting for Pattni, filed the application in July of 2012 but only sought to have it filed as urgent during the judges’ August vacation and on the one and only day when Mutava was holding brief in the Civil Division of the High Court.
At first Kalove acquiesced to not having filed a certificate of urgency when taken to task by Malik. “I can even see that that it was not among the prayers,” he said of the application before later recanting his earlier testimony and taking the position that the he must have sought to have the matter certified as urgent.
It was then that the David Maraga-chaired tribunal directed him to stand down and resume his testimony on Tuesday in order to allow him cross-check the contents of the court file with his own on the matter.
The tribunal is charged with determining if Mutava was compromised by Pattni in the matter as has been alleged by another advocate – Nelson Havi.
Pattni had sought to have a criminal case he was facing in relation to the Goldenberg scam stopped and Mutava granted his prayers when he barred his continued prosecution.
According to Havi it was suspicious that Pattni only sought to have the matter certified as urgent on the day it came before Mutava.
He said it was also irregular for Mutava, who was stationed in the Commercial Division, to continue hearing a case that should properly have been before the Judicial Review division.
Mutava’s defence is that he was asked by fellow Judge Weldon Korir to preside over Judicial Review matters on that Friday in August of 2012 but the latter has denied that it was the case.
When he appeared before the tribunal on April 24, Korir testified that he asked Mutava to preside over civil matters and the Pattni case should have never come before him.
READ: I did not task my ‘brother’ with Bro. Paul Pattni’s case – Judge
Those who acted for the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions and the Attorney General in the matter have however admitted to not having objected to Mutava presiding over the matter despite his being stationed in the Commercial Division.
READ: DPP’s office never objected Mutava presiding over Pattni case
Now Resident Magistrate Gideon Kiage was the latest to make the admission, on Monday, having represented the Attorney General in the matter.
Court Clerk Cylus Kipkurui, who also testified before the tribunal on Monday, corroborated the testimony of Retired Justice Leonard Njagi who has accused Mutava of seeking to improperly influence his finding in another matter.
READ: Former judge spills beans at Justice Mutava probe
He testified that Mutava had on a number of occasions “maybe three times” sent his court clerk, one Violet Waswa, to him to follow up on the progression of the case.
About The Author
