Chief Justice Martha Koome reprimanded Senior Counsels Nelson Havi and Ahmednasir Abdullahi for comments made on the Building Bridges Initiative(BBI) appeal before a ruling was made.
While reading the verdict of the Supreme Court judges on Thursday, March 31, Koome stated that the action by the lawyers amounted to unethical conduct.
The CJ stated it was unethical for any lawyer to comment on the matter before the final ruling.
She noted that they deemed their actions as an attempt to influence the decision of the judges.
"The court observed with concern some commentaries in the pending judgment carried out on social media by some counsels some of whom are appearing in this matter.
"The contents of those commentaries were in our view meant to influence, intimidate and fact scandalise the court," she stated.
Additionally, she hit out at Nairobi-based Lawyer Esther Ang'awa for comments she made on Twitter.
"When the judges retreated to write their judgment, learned counsels Nelson Havi and Esther Ang'awa who appeared here took to social media on different occasions...this amounts to unethical conduct on the part of the counsels," the CJ stated.
The Chief Justice noted that the practice of legal counsels commenting on ongoing cases was becoming a concern reminding the lawyers of their code of Conduct.
"This practice is emerging and unless we stop, it will erode the confidence and the dignity of the court.
"It will also amount to unprofessional conduct by counsels appearing in this matter and out of this matter who know very well that they cannot comment on an ongoing legal matter," she stated.
In response, Havi termed the comments by the CJ as unfortunate stating that lawyers also had a right to express themselves.
"It is quite unfortunate that the statements were made by the CJ. I believe in the freedom of speech that is anchored in the constitution. A judge should be the last person to muzzle individuals from speaking," Havi stated.
He defended his views noting that President Uhuru Kenyatta and former Prime Minister, both interested parties in the case, made remarks regarding BBI.
