Lawyers and parties involved in the judges’ retirement appeal at the court of appeal are divided over the hearing date of the case.
Kalpana Rawals’ lawyer, Kioko Kilukumi argues that the decision by the chief justice to speed up the case was an interference of the judiciary and rendered other judges of the Supreme Court powerless.
His sentiments were echoed by John Haminwa and Jennifer Shamala from Kituo cha Sheria who said that the CJ must respect Judge Njoki Ndung'u's directive.
The law society of Kenya argues that the CJ did not have the jurisdiction to interfere with the case and that his decision was not only unlawful but also uncalled for.
The judicial service commission opined that the CJ had the powers to control the judiciary and oversee its mandate. They also argued that appeal by Rawal is not provided for in section 163 of the constitution.
Activist Okiya Omtata argued that by deciding that the case be heard on 24 Judge Njoki Ndung'u overstepped her powers.
The judges will rule on the hearing date standoff this Wednesday.