Economy

Clerk defends suspended judge over Pattni file

mutava

Justice Joseph Mutava follows proceedings at a tribunal probing him over Goldenberg in Nairobi on April 18,2016. PHOTO | EVANS HABIL

The tribunal hearing complaints against suspended judge Joseph Mutava was told Thursday that he did not direct High Court registry officials to hide a file relating to businessman Kamlesh Pattni.

Alfred Obendo, a former executive officer in the commercial division at Milimani Law Courts, Nairobi, said he had made a decision to keep the file under lock and key in the registry so that it does not get mixed up with other files, given it had emanated from the judicial review division.

“Whenever a file was from another division, I would keep it in safe custody to avoid a situation where it is mixed with other files. Judge Mutava never talked to me about the custody of the file involving Pattni or any other court file,” said Mr Obendo.

He told the tribunal that it was not unusual for files meant for the judicial review division of the High Court to be heard by judges in the commercial division, adding that at the time there were several other files meant for the judicial review division which were being heard in the commercial division.

Some of the court files also had directions from the presiding judge or the chief justice regarding their sensitivity and the need to keep them safely. In one of the cases Chief Justice Willy Mutunga had directed that files be kept under lock and key, he said.

READ: Judge defiant after clearing Pattni of Goldenberg scam

He said files were also kept in a secluded place whenever complaints arose regarding them missing when needed by lawyers who wanted to fix a hearing date.

Ms Violet Waswa, previously Mr Justice Mutava’s court clerk, said that the judge was sometimes in 2012 supposed to deliver rulings on behalf of another judge, who was away, but realised one file was missing.

Ms Waswa who was being cross examined by lawyer Philip Nyachoti representing Justice Mutava, said Judge Mutava sent her to look for the missing file from the other judge’s court clerk but got no assistance.

The said file has formed part of the investigations before the tribunal given the controversy surrounding the leakage of a ruling before it was officially delivered in court.

The said ruling was thrown in the compound of one of the parties days prior to its delivery. Hearing continues on May 9.