A bitter battle is brewing at the High Court in Nairobi as Supreme Court Judge Isaac Lenaola fights off bribery allegations.
The judge has taken on Mr Kung’u Muigai, who made the bribery claims arising from a court ruling issued 21 years ago, which upheld a disputed finding that Muigai’s firm had consented to the auctioning of its land by KCB Bank to recover a debt.
At the heart of the defamation suit initiated by Justice Lenaola are Mr Muigai's allegations that a Sh1 million bribe influenced the judge’s 2004 ruling while serving at the High Court. The judge has denied the bribery claim.
Also in the court proceedings are forgery claims on the distribution of properties belonging to former minister John Keen, who died in 2016. The defendant, in his response, has claimed Keen’s signature was forged in the execution of his Will on the distribution of his estate.
Justice Lenaola was one of the executors of the Will before he resigned from the role in November 2020.
The judge claims that Mr Muigai defamed him through social media platforms, including YouTube, Facebook, X and WhatsApp, by linking him and other judges of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal to corruption.
He is also aggrieved by Mr Muigai’s decision to link judges to the killing of his (Mr Muigai’s) lawyer in Nairobi.
In response, Mr Muigai has denied that the statements were malicious, leaving the court to test the veracity of the arguments.
Justice Lenaola says that despite receiving a demand notice to retract the alleged defamatory publication and to cease making any further statements against him, Mr Muigai did not stop.
Supreme Court Judge Isaac Lenaola.
Photo credit: File | Nation Media Group
On September 25, Mr Muigai did another video interview reiterating the allegations of corruption in the Judiciary in relation to the handling of cases involving his properties and the auction of a 443-acre coffee farm in Juja, Kiambu County.
In the said interview aired on various social media platforms, Mr Muigai, without giving details, alleged that a July 2004 court order, which affirmed an earlier ruling issued in 1992, was procured through a Sh1 million bribe. The order paved the way for the auction of the land.
He, however, did not provide evidence of the corruption claims and also did not explain why he spoke about the matter 21 years after the alleged malpractice.
“The defendant was informed by an employee of Kenya Commercial Bank (KCB) whose identity the defendant is ready, willing and able to disclose to the court in camera, that the judgment delivered on July 23, 2004, in Hccc No.1576 of 1999 by the plaintiff (Lenaola) was procured through a bribe of Sh1 million,” argues Mr Muigai’s advocate, Nelson Havi.
Complaints of gross misconduct
Mr Lenaola denies the allegations and is expected to file a substantive response in court ahead of the hearing of the case, which is before Justice Nixon Sifuna.
Court documents reveal the dispute originates from conflicting judgments about the land owned by Mr Muigai’s Muiri Coffee Estates Limited.
Mr Muigai’s advocates argue that Muiri Coffee, together with Benjoh Amalgamated Limited, had offered titles of two other properties to KCB as security for credit facilities advanced to Benjoh, which allegedly executed a judgment consent in court for the sale of the land. The credit was to enable Benjoh to venture into the business of growing flowers in Nyandarua for export.
“No such consent judgment was executed or recorded by or on behalf of Benjoh Amalgamated Limited and Muiri Coffee Estate Limited,” Mr Havi says, adding that a ruling delivered on October 31, 1997, by Justice Erastus Githinji confirmed the same.
Supreme Court Judge Isaac Lenaola.
Photo credit: File | Nation Media Group
He further states that two other rulings delivered on November 17, 2009 and June 24, 2010, by justices Joyce Khaminwa and Jeanne Gacheche, respectively, determined that no such consent judgment was executed by the two entities.
However, according to Mr Havi, in a judgment dated July 23, 2004, Justice Lenaola held that the disputed consent judgment existed and was executed and recorded by Benjoh and Muiri Coffee on May 4, 1992.
“The Judicial Service Commission which is mandated to consider and investigate complaints of gross misconduct and misbehaviour against judges has shielded the judges of the High Court, the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court responsible for the loss of property... through corruption,” says Mr Havi.
In response to claims of disparaging the Judiciary, Mr Havi says his client’s statements were fair comment made in good faith and without malice on a matter of public interest—rampant corruption in the arm of government.
Mr Lenaola’s advocate, Herman Omiti, says the judge believes that Mr Muigai’s statements were ill-intended and orchestrated to besmirch his reputation.
“The applicant holds a very distinguished seat as a Justice of the Supreme Court of Kenya and he, therefore, has a right to claim that his reputation should not be disparaged by defamatory statements made about him without lawful justification or excuse,” says Mr Omiti.
Pending determination of the case, the High Court has since issued orders restraining Mr Muigai from publishing or making further defamatory statements against Justice Lenaola.
Justice Sifuna, in a ruling dated October 1, granted an interim injunction barring Mr Muigai or anyone acting on his behalf from circulating on any media or platform remarks considered defamatory of the judge. The case is scheduled for mention on October 13.
