A fresh wave of criticism has placed Kenya’s Judiciary under intense public scrutiny after Senior Counsel Ahmednasir Abdullahi launched a strong attack against Justice Josephine Mong’are over her handling of a case linked to one of the country’s biggest corporate transactions.
His remarks have sparked renewed debate about judicial independence, accountability, and the impact of court decisions on Kenya’s investment climate.
In a statement shared online, Ahmednasir accused Justice Mong’are of dishonesty, alleging that she twists facts and the law to reach outcomes that favour particular litigants.
He went further by describing her as a “JurisPESA judge” and warned that judges he considers compromised could damage the country’s future.
The outspoken lawyer has consistently criticised the Judiciary over the years, often alleging corruption within the institution.
His previous remarks prompted the Judiciary to ask the Director of Public Prosecutions to investigate what it described as repeated and unsubstantiated attacks against judges.
His latest criticism comes at a time when the courts are handling a high-profile dispute involving East African Breweries Limited (EABL).
The company is at the centre of a proposed Sh340 billion transaction in which British multinational Diageo plans to sell its controlling stake in EABL to Japan’s Asahi Group Holdings.
The deal is expected to generate about Sh42 billion in capital gains tax for the Kenyan government while also marking one of the largest foreign investment transactions in the country’s history.
Despite its economic significance, the deal has been delayed by several court cases. One of the most controversial developments emerged after a petition filed in Machakos resulted in conservatory orders stopping the transaction.
The orders were issued by Justice Josephine Mong’are on the same day a Nairobi court had dismissed a similar application seeking to halt the deal.
EABL has strongly objected to the developments, arguing that the multiple cases filed in different courts amount to forum shopping. According to the company’s lawyers, the petitioner resides in Nairobi, raising questions about why the matter was filed in Machakos after similar attempts had failed elsewhere.
They argue that allowing parallel cases over the same issue creates confusion and opens the door to conflicting court decisions.
The company has since written to the Chief Justice, expressing concern that such legal disputes could undermine investor confidence. EABL argues that uncertainty surrounding major commercial transactions may discourage both local and international investors who rely on predictable legal processes before committing billions of shillings to the Kenyan economy.
The controversy has now moved beyond a single court ruling. It has raised broader questions about how the Judiciary manages cases involving similar disputes and whether safeguards are sufficient to prevent conflicting decisions from different courts.
Legal observers note that consistency in judicial decisions is important in maintaining public confidence and ensuring businesses can operate within a stable legal environment.
Judicial independence remains a key pillar of Kenya’s constitutional order. Judges are expected to decide cases based on the law and the evidence presented before them, regardless of public opinion or criticism from influential individuals.
Court decisions that attract disagreement can be challenged through the appeals process rather than through personal attacks against judicial officers.
Add Comment