Court dismisses petition challenging Muturi’s removal, says former AG resigned voluntarily
Justice Mugambi found that the resignation letter, dated July 11, 2024, and the subsequent gazette notice constituted sufficient evidence that Muturi left office voluntarily.
The High Court has dismissed a petition challenging the removal of former Attorney General Justin Muturi from office, ruling that he voluntarily resigned and was not dismissed by President William Ruto as alleged.
Justice Lawrence Mugambi delivered the decision, stating that the petitioners failed to prove their claims that President Ruto acted unconstitutionally when he announced Muturi's exit through a televised address and a Gazette notice dated July 12, 2024.
More To Read
- AG, NPS back Harun Mwau in petition to bar police commission from recruiting constables
- Justin Muturi denies secret talks with President Ruto, labels reports ‘fake news’
- Explainer: All you need to know about the prestigious 'Senior Counsel' title
- Senators demand tough action after Lands CS Alice Wahome skips appearance
- AG denies knowledge of police officer’s death in Haiti despite Ruto’s statement at UN
- Court clears Ruto’s inclusion of external advisors in Cabinet meetings
The petition, filed by Dr Magare Gikenyi and six others, sought declarations nullifying Executive Order No. 6 of 2024 and Gazette Notice No. 8440, arguing that Muturi's alleged dismissal violated Article 132(2)(b) of the Constitution and Section 12 of the Office of the Attorney General Act.
The petitioners also asked the court to quash the subsequent appointment of Dorcas Oduor as Attorney General, contending that there was no lawful vacancy in the office.
Through the Attorney General's office, the State maintained that Muturi had tendered his resignation in writing to the President on July 11, 2024, as provided under Section 11 of the Act, and that the resignation was duly accepted and published in the Kenya Gazette.
The National Assembly also confirmed that Muturi personally appeared before the Committee on Appointments on August 4, 2024, where he affirmed that he had resigned to allow the president to reorganise his Cabinet.
Justice Mugambi found that the resignation letter, dated July 11, 2024, and the subsequent gazette notice constituted sufficient evidence that Muturi left office voluntarily.
The judge emphasised that under the Evidence Act, Gazette notices are prima facie proof of the facts they contain unless proven otherwise.
"The petitioner relied on a press release to allege a dismissal, but failed to provide admissible evidence to contradict the official documents presented by the respondents," the judge stated, adding that there was no proof of forgery or tampering with the gazette notice as alleged.
The court ruled that the burden of proof lay with the petitioners, who failed to establish that the president unlawfully removed the Attorney General.
"The petitioners did not meet the required standard of proof on a balance of probabilities," Justice Mugambi held.
Consequently, the court dismissed the petition for lack of merit but declined to award costs, noting that it was filed in the public interest.
The ruling affirms the legality of Muturi's resignation and the subsequent appointment of Oduor as Attorney General.
Top Stories Today
