The Advocates Disciplinary Tribunal has found the former Law Society of Kenya President, Nelson Havi, guilty of displaying and uttering defamatory statements against Allen Gichuhi on his X account and during an interview on a local TV station on July 12 and 13, 2021.
According to the tribunal, Havi's social media posts and words during the interview were unbecoming and demeaned the image of the legal profession, especially given his position as the LSK president.
Havi had alleged that Gichuhi, a former LSK president and his predecessor, was involved in the 'theft' of funds.
"The use of the demeaning, feministic and vulgar language in the social media posts referred to in the complaint does not in any way uplift the image of the legal profession in the eyes of the general public, especially because they were originating from the president of the LSK at the time," it stated.
"Leader of LSK represents the profession collectively, such that when they display low or despicable standards of conduct, it is likely to be perceived by the general public as the acceptable standard of conduct in the entire profession," he added.
The tribunal confirmed that Gichuhi filed an affidavit on July 19, 2021, accusing Havi of publishing and uttering the statements.
According to Guchuhi, Havi's statements tarnished his name and caused mental anguish and distress.
"According to him. Publications amounted to blackmailing and maligning his name. The complainant further annexed several copies of tweets posted by the accused advocates on their Twitter accounts as exhibits," it stated.
According to the tribunal, Havi should have followed the necessary legal protocols to 'accuse his colleague of theft' by filing a formal complaint with the Directorate of Criminal Investigations (DCI) for proper actions to be taken.
According to the tribunal, the inappropriate use of social media, especially in a way that undermines the dignity of the legal profession, amounts to professional misconduct and contravenes the Code of Standards of Professional Practice and Ethical Conduct (SOPPEC).
"For the reasons given above, we find the accused advocate guilty of professional misconduct under section (604) of the Advocates Act and convict him accordingly."
According to the tribunal, Havi admitted to posting and uttering the words but stressed that they did not amount to professional misconduct.
"He stated that the allegation raised by the complainant arises from the style of his (accused advocate's) leadership, which was aggressive and did not sit well with the complainant and hence cannot be a ground for disciplinary action," it stated.
