High Court judge Mary Kasango has refused to recuse herself from a Sh1.5 billion debt case facing Cabinet Secretary Raphael Tuju.
In a brief ruling, she said Tuju had failed to provide compelling evidence to prove allegations of bias. Kasango said it would be a disservice to the oath of office she took 17 years ago to yield to Tuju’s unreasonable and unsubstantiated call for her recusal.
“I decline to give in to fear and intimidation directed towards me. I have always done my utmost to ensure that I handle all matters before me with utmost fairness and transparency. I have been true to the oath of office, which I took upon my appointment,” she said.
The matter will, however, still be handled by a new judge as Kasango is one of the judges recently transferred to other stations by Chief Justice David Maraga.
Tuju sought to have Kasango out of the case following a petition he filed at the Judicial Service Commission regarding her conduct. He accused the judge of bias and favouritism in the debt case pitting him against East Africa Development Bank.
He said throughout proceedings in the case, the judge has exhibited favouritism towards EADB and bias against Dari Limited and its directors. This, he says, is evident from the judge’s failure to act wisely in matters that harm Dari Limited and its directors.
Tuju accused Kasango of failure to act on an urgent application he had filed regarding receivership and insolvency proceedings. In the insolvency case, the bank wants Dari Ltd declared bankrupt for failing to repay the loan advanced to it in April 2015.
Regarding receivership, the bank had filed contempt proceedings against Dari Ltd and its directors for preventing the appointed receiver managers from accessing the company premises.
Tuju wanted those two applications suspended pending an appeal. He says the judge’s failure to hear and determine that the application cannot be unplanned because the existence of the application was brought to her attention but she chose to completely ignore it.
“The explanation given to my advocates on record is strange, to say the least. It was reported that the Judiciary e-filing system did not pick up the urgent application because it was bundled together with other documents, hence the same was not detected as an urgent matter,” he said.
“Kasango’s failure to handle the urgent application has occasioned us grave injustice. No reason or justification can satisfactorily explain why this application was not heard with the urgency it deserved. The reasons advanced by the Judge are unacceptable.”
Tuju has since asked the JSC to have Kasango removed on the grounds of gross misconduct.