Two Kenyans want Justice Chitembwe sacked over incompetence, gross misconduct
Two people have petitioned Judicial Service Commission seeking the removal of High Court judge Justice Juma Said Chitembwe from office over claims of gross misconduct and incompetence.
Imgard Beige and David Leboo Olekilusu contend that the judge lacks integrity to continue holding office and that he breached the Constitutional provisions on integrity, the judicial service code of conduct and the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct while handling a succession cause in Malindi.
The two petitioners accuse the judge of entertaining a succession cause regarding an immovable property which was located outside the court’s supervisory and administrative jurisdiction.
According to the two, the judge who was then stationed at Malindi high court handled a succession cause which was concluded with a judgment on May 16, 2018.
The two petitioners who are directors of Pacific Frontier Seas Limited, which was an objector in the suit, claim that the judge declined to transfer the file to Mombasa high court which was the court with geographical and supervisory jurisdiction over the estate of the deceased which had died in Diani, Kwale County.
They accuse the Judge of disregarding uncontroverted evidence of ownership of the property in kwale and holding that a limited liability company’s properties can be distributed through a succession cause in spite of the basic principle that a company has perpetual succession and does not die.
The two petitioners claim before the judgment was delivered on May 16, 2018, the suit property was transferred and registered in the name of the judge’s brother, one Amana Said Jirani.
“The entire Judgment and in particular the disregard of the basic principle of law on separate legal personality bespeaks fraudulent and corrupt dealings by the Judge and is therefore a fruit of a poisonous tree," they said in petition.
They contend that they have credible information that the Judge was influenced in order to dismiss their objection.
“The Judge had personal interest in the suit property and the objection proceedings were nothing but mere formalities,” they said.
They accuse the judge of gross misconduct by having interest in the suit property whose ownership was at stake before him and acquiring the said property through his bother in spite of the order staying execution of his judgement.
“The judge demonstrated open bias, malice and ineptitude in the conduct of the proceedings and the Judgement and ought not to be allowed to continue acting as a judge,” they said in the petition.