Tuesday, June 18, 2024

Ahmednasir Abdullahi files petition challenging Supreme Court ban

Lawyer Ahmednasir Abdullahi has moved to the East African Court of Justice to file a petition against the Supreme Court of Kenya.

This follows Thursday ruling that permanently banned the lawyer from the court, his clients or his employees at large.

“I have instructed my lawyers to file a petition in the East African Court of Justice at Arusha to seek legal redress against KOOME’s judicial skulduggery and niggling shenanigans. I will not waste time in going to KOOME’s CORRUPT COURT!” said Ahmednasir.

Immediately after the ruling, the lawyer noted that this is the second time in 30 years that the court has denied him audience on matters corrupt judges saying that he is the first lawyer in history to be denied audience after calling the judges out.

“Second time in my 30 years law career that the courts refused me audience for calling the removal of corrupt judges from the courts. First time was in 2000 when I was ejected from court and told not to come back because I presented paper in law Society of Kenyaannual conference calling for the reconstitution of the High Court and the Court of Appeal afresh.

No other lawyer in the history of Kenya was denied audience for calling out corrupt and incompetent judges.” he said

Following the ban, several prominent lawyers have called the Supreme Court saying how unconstitutional is it for them to ban a senior counsel due to an argument.

“It’s patently UNCONSTITUTIONAL for the Supreme Court of Kenya to ban Senior Counsel Ahmednasir or his associates from appearing before it. Free speech is the cornerstone of democracy. You don’t win an argument by gagging your opponent. That’s fascism. Shame on them!” said Prof. Makau Mutua

“I spoke with Ahmednasir. The Supreme Court has irredeemably lost it on this one.

1. Every person has a constitutional right to counsel of his choice. The Court cannot violate a consumer’s rights by dictating who should appear before them.

2. The Court has no legal right to bar an Advocate duly authorized by the Law Society to practice law.

3. The decision has no basis in law, is illegal, irregular & paints the Court as a purveyor of injustice.

4. At a time when the Judiciary is in cross hairs the decision justifies the attacks on the Judiciary.

5. The Court decision violates the principle of right to be heard. A basic element of any fair decision.

6. The decision sets a dangerous precedent where courts can bar anyone they dislike.

7. The Law Society will not allow its statutory mandate to be encroached upon by the Court and will seek an immediate retraction & apology from the Supreme Court.” said LSK President Erik Theuri

Related Articles


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Stay Connected

- Advertisement -

Latest Articles