NAIROBI, Kenya, Feb 3 – The Tribunal probing Justice Mohammed Noor Kullow over allegations of violating the Constitution and the Judicial Service Code of Conduct has presented its report to President William Ruto, recommending his reinstatement to the Environment and Land Court (ELC).
The tribunal chaired by Justice Patrick Kiage, an Appeal Court Judge, noted that the thirteen allegations leveled against the judge were unsubstantiated and not proven to the required extent.
“Pursuant to Article 168(7) of the Constitution and Gazette Notice No. 2536, the Tribunal has completed its inquiry. After considering all evidence tendered and the applicable law, the Tribunal finds that the thirteen allegations have not been established to the required extent,” the tribunal stated in a letter presented to President Ruto on Monday.
“In accordance with Article 168(7)(b) of the Constitution, we therefore recommend to Your Excellency that the Honourable Mr. Justice Mohammed Noor Kullow be reinstated to the Office of Judge of the Environment and Land Court,” it proposed.
The Kiage-led team ruled that the judge’s conduct was not in breach of the Judicial Service (Code of Conduct and Ethics) Regulations 2020 and did not amount to gross misconduct, contrary to Article 168(1)(b) and (e) of the Constitution.
Satisfactory explantion
While acknowledging delays in delivering rulings on some of the instances listed, the tribunal stated that Justice Kullow had provided a satisfactory explanation with reasonable justification, which did not amount to gross misconduct.
Regarding the allegation of failure to record reasons for delays in delivering judgments, the tribunal found the claim substantiated, as the judge had not recorded or forwarded the reasons to the Chief Justice. It however noted the omission did not amount to gross misconduct.
On the allegation of failing to respond to correspondence from the Chief Justice, the tribunal stated that the claim was not proven, explaining that the delay was due to the judge’s absence from his station, and he responded at the earliest opportunity.
The tribunal further clarified that it was not Justice Kullow’s responsibility to issue notices regarding allegations that he delivered rulings and judgments without proper notification.
Regarding the accusation that Kullow was not diligent and lacked promptitude in executing his judicial duties by delaying or failing to deliver rulings, the tribunal ruled that this was not proven.
The delays were explained, and a lack of ability and fitness was not established, the Kiage-led panel held.
Conflicting orders
On the allegation of issuing conflicting orders in Narok, the tribunal noted that the judge had released the file after corrections, allowing the petitioner to file a notice of appeal.
This follows an investigation launched by the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) in March 2024 after petitions accused Justice Kullow of, among other things, violating the Constitution and the Judicial Service Code of Conduct.
President Ruto suspended Justice Kullow on March 8, 2024, following the JSC’s recommendation and gazetted a tribunal to investigate him.
Justice Kullow was among four judges referred to President Ruto for tribunal investigations into their conduct.
He faced accusations of delays or failure to deliver rulings or judgments in a total of 116 cases.
Five petitions were filed with the JSC calling for his removal.
“The Commission was satisfied that three out of the five petitions, as well as the proceedings initiated by the Commission, disclosed grounds for his removal from office over gross misconduct, incompetence, and violation of the Judicial Service Code of Conduct,” Chief Justice Martha Koome stated, adding that “two petitions were dismissed for failing to disclose sufficient grounds for removal.”
Article 168(1) of the Constitution outlines the specific grounds for removing a judge, including inability to perform judicial functions due to mental or physical incapacity, bankruptcy, breach of the code of conduct, incompetence, and gross misconduct or misbehavior.
Once a tribunal is established, it conducts hearings, gathers evidence, and submits its recommendations to the President, who can either accept the recommendation and dismiss the judge or reject it and reinstate them.
