Justice Njoki Ndung'u moves to block petition for her removal from Supreme Court

In court documents submitted through her lawyer, Andrew Musangi, Justice Njoki is challenging the JSC’s jurisdiction to hear and determine the petitions against her and six other Supreme Court judges, including Chief Justice Martha Koome.

The petitions—lodged by Tuju’s Dari Limited, Havi, and lawyer Christopher Rosan—call for the removal of the entire Supreme Court bench over alleged misconduct and incompetence.

However, the judge clarified that she is not contesting Rosan’s petition.  

Justice Njoki argues that the JSC’s proceedings violate constitutional safeguards on judicial independence, citing Article 160, which protects judges from external influence.

She wants the court to issue interim orders to suspend the hearings until the case against the Commission is determined, describing the process as unconstitutional and an overreach into judicial decision-making.  

The judge further asserts that the petitions before the JSC involve matters either pending in court or already resolved, rendering them procedurally flawed.

She criticizes the Commission’s decision to move forward with the substantive hearings, warning that this could set a precedent for vexatious litigants to misuse the JSC as a tool to intimidate judges.  

While acknowledging the JSC’s role in judicial accountability, Justice Njoki, through her lawyer, maintains that the Commission lacks the authority to reassess or overturn judicial rulings made within a judge’s lawful mandate.

Musangi argues that the JSC’s role is strictly confined to investigating claims of misconduct, incapacity, or incompetence, as outlined by law.  

“The petitioner, a sitting Supreme Court Judge, has been subjected to unconstitutional disciplinary proceedings before the JSC, based solely on judicial decisions rendered within the scope of her official duties,” Musangi states.