The former Nairobi governor made the allegations under oath in his defence in a KSh20 million graft trial. Retired President Uhuru Kenyatta is not shown to have responded in the coverage reviewed.
Former Nairobi Governor Mike Sonko has told the Anti-Corruption Court that retired High Court Judge Said Juma Chitembwe confided in him that former President Uhuru Kenyatta had directed him not to grant orders that could have stopped Sonko's impeachment. The claims were made while he testified in his own defence before Magistrate Isabellah Barasa in the KSh20 million graft case. They are allegations made under oath and have not been established as facts.
Sonko told the court that Chitembwe showed him communication that he said contained the former president's instructions. He also alleged that the judge had prepared a draft ruling finding the impeachment improper for lack of quorum, that he was not allowed to keep a copy, and that the draft was later destroyed on Kenyatta's alleged instructions. He further claimed that lawyers linked to State House helped prepare a replacement judgment that dismissed his challenge.
He said he later visited the judge's home in Nairobi, accompanied by National Intelligence Service personnel who introduced themselves as lawyers, and that he and the judge spent about seven hours discussing the case, part of it in the judge's bedroom. Sonko also alleged that Chitembwe asked him for KSh10 million to test whether the Court of Appeal could be compromised, and that police recovered the money from the judge's chambers. He said he recorded his conversations with the judge and would play the recordings in court.
The allegations build on a long-running dispute. In 2021, Sonko released videos accusing Chitembwe of corruption, and the Judicial Service Commission summoned him as a witness. One of the videos allegedly showed a man believed to be a senior State House official saying he had been sent to persuade Chitembwe not to stop the impeachment. At that time, Chitembwe dismissed the allegations in a television interview, saying he was unfairly targeted. A tribunal later investigated his conduct and recommended his removal, a decision the Supreme Court upheld, according to the article that prompted this piece.
Sonko's attempts to reopen his own impeachment have so far failed. The Supreme Court declined to let him introduce the audio and video recordings as fresh evidence, saying he had not explained their relevance to the question of his removal from office. The courts found that the impeachment process followed constitutional and legal requirements, and a three-judge High Court bench that included Chitembwe reached the same conclusion in June 2021.
Sonko also told the court that the graft case against him was politically engineered after he fell out with the previous administration, citing his refusal to sign the Nairobi County budget and his stance on the Building Bridges Initiative. He has denied the graft charges. The case was sent back for retrial after the High Court overturned an earlier acquittal, finding that the trial court had relied on an outdated charge sheet.
Several points are worth keeping in mind. Sworn testimony is a claim until it is tested, and the defence hearing is still under way, so cross-examination and the promised recordings have yet to be examined by the court. Chitembwe's removal confirms findings about his own conduct but does not by itself prove what Sonko says about instructions from Kenyatta. And none of the coverage reviewed includes a response from Kenyatta or his representatives to these specific allegations. Readers should look for any reply from him, from Chitembwe, or from State House as the case continues.
This article is based on a pasted news report and background coverage of earlier proceedings, and the testimony has not been independently verified. Anyone named is entitled to a fair hearing, and the court will decide what weight, if any, the evidence deserves.
Comments
Post a Comment