WATCH THE RULING HERE LIVE.
The courtroom witnessed tense exchanges as Kinyanjui, representing activist Enoch Aura in a separate constitutional petition linked to the impeachment process, urged the three-judge bench to suspend the ruling until the Court of Appeal could hear an urgent application he had filed.
Aura's legal team argued that critical constitutional questions raised in their petition had not been adequately addressed and that proceeding with the judgment risked creating legal complications.
The courtroom witnessed tense exchanges as Kinyanjui, representing activist Enoch Aura in a separate constitutional petition linked to the impeachment process, urged the three-judge bench to suspend the ruling until the Court of Appeal could hear an urgent application he had filed.
Aura's legal team argued that critical constitutional questions raised in their petition had not been adequately addressed and that proceeding with the judgment risked creating legal complications.
According to Kinyanjui, his client had already moved to the Court of Appeal seeking orders to halt the judgment until his concerns were heard and determined.
Addressing the court, Kinyanjui informed the bench that he had filed Civil Application No. E291 of 2026 under a certificate of urgency.
Addressing the court, Kinyanjui informed the bench that he had filed Civil Application No. E291 of 2026 under a certificate of urgency.
He argued that the Court of Appeal had supervisory authority over the High Court and requested the judges to postpone delivering the ruling for at least a day to allow the appellate court to consider the matter.
However, the request was swiftly rejected by the bench comprising Justices Eric Ogolla, Freda Mugambi, and Anthony Mrima.
The judges maintained that no order had been issued by the Court of Appeal stopping them from proceeding with the judgment.
However, the request was swiftly rejected by the bench comprising Justices Eric Ogolla, Freda Mugambi, and Anthony Mrima.
The judges maintained that no order had been issued by the Court of Appeal stopping them from proceeding with the judgment.
0 Comments