The revelations are detailed in a transcript of the conversation between Kiplagat and Bidali during their first meeting in Eldoret.
He said he had given Kiplagat an “opportunity to walk away” if he never wanted to pursue the case.
“If you say you want to withdraw, it will end here,” Bidali told Kiplagat… “If you get to our programme sometimes you can even be relocated.”
To Ngatia, his moves were more of an “inducement to Kiplagat,” since he had not even ascertained the nature of the security threats he was facing.
Bidali was also put on spot over the legal parameters he used in investigating the judge, after it emerged that his office lacks legal backing in the constitution.
The ombudsman, a magistrate in the Judiciary, could be in office illegally according to Lawyer Ngatia.
“The judge considers the matter could have been investigated by JSC,” Ngatia told the tribunal while complaining that, “the Judge was not given an opportunity to be heard.”
According to Article 168 of the Constitution, “The removal of a judge may be initiated only by the Judicial Service Commission acting on its own motion or on a petition by any person to the Judicial Service Commission.”
The tribunal continues with the cross-examination of witnesses on Thursday.