The Judicial Service Commission has appealed the High Court ruling that stopped the Commission from processing petitions for the removal of judges from office on December 19.
The Judicial Service Commission announced this in a statement released on December 24, where it expressed its dissatisfaction with the ruling. The Commission says that the ruling constrains it from discharging its constitutional mandate.
“While the Commission respects the authority, role and decisional independence of the courts, it registers its considered dissatisfaction with aspects of the judgment, which, in its assessment, constrain the discharge of the Commission’s constitutional mandate under Article 168,” the statement read.
The Commission says it has been mandated under Article 172 of the Constitution to safeguard and advance judicial independence and accountability.
It says that it was within its mandate to process the petitions for the removal of judges.
“Article 168 vests in the Commission the responsibility to receive, consider and, where the constitutional threshold is met, act upon petitions for the removal of Judges of the superior courts, whether initiated by the Commission on its own motion or upon petition by any person,” the Judicial Service Commission said.
An advocate representing a judge facing disciplinary actions had filed a petition, which led to the court giving the final judgment on December 19 that stopped JSC from processing all the petitions on the removal of judges.
The High Court's ruling focused on the JSC's failure to adhere to the Fair Administrative Action Act and the Judicial Service Act.
The court found that the JSC was using "undocumented and unpredictable internal procedures" to handle complaints. It ruled that the JSC cannot process any removal petitions until it formally gazettes regulations for doing so.
In the ruling, the court said that while the JSC has a constitutional mandate to receive petitions, the court clarified that this power must be exercised through a clear, transparent, and fair legal framework that protects judges from arbitrary intimidation.
The Judicial Service Commission has, however, insisted that it remains committed to upholding the Constitution, respecting court decisions and utilising all lawful avenues provided within the legal framework when dissatisfied with a judicial determination.
In the statement, the Commission reaffirmed its role as a facilitator and promoter of judicial accountability and protector of judicial independence.
