Lawyers Demand Magistrate Recuse Herself in MP Murder Case, Citing Bias
"Your honor there cannot be two different rulings from the same court arising from the same matter facts and same subjects," Omari stated.
A team of lawyers representing Edwin Oduor and Ebel Ochieng persons of interest in the murder of Kasipul Member of Parliament Charles Ong’ondo Were are urging the magistrate to recuse herself in prosecuting the matter.
The lawyers led by Danstan Omari, Sam Nyamberi, Stanley Kinyanjui, Cliff Ombeta, and Shadrack Wambui urged Jomo Kenyatta International Airport (JKIA) principal magistrate Irene Gichobi to recuse herself in the hearing of the application and be handled by any other magistrate.
While presenting their submissions, the counsels indicated the dissatisfaction of their client with reasons that the court is biased.
In his submissions, Omari indicated that the matter being handled by the court is about the assassination of the late Member of Parliament and the court has decided to detain the other suspects for 30 days as prayed by the investigating officers,
“Your honor there cannot be two different rulings from the same court arising from the same matter facts and same subjects,” Omari stated.
He urged the court to recuse itself saying that the outcome regarding the number of days by the court is a perception that is already determined,
“The 1st and second respondents says they are not comfortable the matter being handled by this court,” he added.
On his part, Nyamberi submitted that the 1st respondent’s perception is that the court is not fair in prosecuting the matter on account of being biased,
“The question that he is asking is whether the court would be impartial on the decisions it’s going to make,” he told the court.
Ombeta added that it is a sense of courage and integrity to take the decision of recusal and the matter be handled by another magistrate.
Further, Wambui concurred with his colleagues saying that Ms Gichobi is going to arrive at the same determination in the number of days sought by investigators,
“The respondents are apprehensive that this court will not deliver a fair ruling,” Wambui said.
In response, the prosecution vehemently opposed recusal citing that the court has the jurisdiction and is competent to make a fair ruling.
The victim’s family lawyer Apollo Mboya disregarded the application for the recusal of the court citing that no grounds were presented to allow the application,
“Your honor the parties must establish high standard basis in their application so that the application to be admitted,” Mboya submitted.
He added that factual foundations on bias should be presented and if not, it fails.
Mboya indicated that bias must be specifically alleged and must be established and if not the issue of bias does not arise.
He also said that the judicial officer took an oath to deliver justice fairly without fear or favor.
On their part, he concluded that there is no basis for recusal of the court.
In giving directions, the court set to deliver the ruling on whether to recuse itself or not on May 13, 2025.
