The Judiciary on Trial: Why Edwin Dande’s Petition Against Justice Alfred Mabeya Matters To Every Kenyan

In a country where justice is already precarious, the filing of a petition against a sitting High Court judge is not just a headline but a national call to accountability. Edwin H. Dande’s 364-page petition to the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) against Justice Alfred Mabeya is not simply a legal issue; it is a microcosm of a judiciary teetering on the brink of collapse due to corruption, impunity, and procedural injustices. The petition speaks not only to one man’s grievances but to the collective suffering of thousands of Kenyans denied justice.

At the heart of the matter is Justice Mabeya’s handling of insolvency cases—a sensitive area of the law that deals with businesses and livelihoods hanging by a thread. Insolvency courts exist to rehabilitate businesses, offer hope to creditors, and safeguard jobs. Yet, according to the petition, Justice Mabeya has allegedly turned these proceedings into a theatre of rushed decisions, ignored procedures, and irregular liquidation orders. The allegations, if proven true, showcase how judicial power can be weaponized against the very people it is supposed to protect.

For any Kenyan, particularly business owners, entrepreneurs, and employees dependent on struggling firms, the allegations strike a nerve. The petition outlines glaring instances where Justice Mabeya purportedly issued liquidation orders that no party had prayed for—a draconian move that dismantles businesses without due regard to their economic and social impact. This raises a chilling question: if businesses seeking judicial refuge can be arbitrarily liquidated, where else can Kenyans turn for relief?

Read Also: Kenya’s Negative Descent: Tracing The Roots Of Socioeconomic Turmoil Amidst Governance Unending Crisis

Equally concerning is the accusation that Justice Mabeya inferred fraud without hearings or interrogations. Fraud is a serious accusation that demands concrete evidence, proper proceedings, and an opportunity for all parties to defend themselves. To bypass these fundamental principles is to shred the very fabric of fair trial rights enshrined in Kenya’s Constitution. Injustice in insolvency matters ripples outward: employees lose jobs, creditors lose payments, and families lose livelihoods. These are not abstract consequences; they are devastating realities for thousands of Kenyans.

Dande’s petition also accuses Justice Mabeya of condemning parties unheard. This is a judicial sin of the highest order. The rule of law rests upon the principle that all parties are entitled to a fair hearing. To deny this is not only unconstitutional but morally bankrupt. Justice, once denied to one, creates a dangerous precedent for all. If judges can pass judgment without listening, then the judiciary ceases to be a temple of justice and becomes an instrument of tyranny.

It is important to note that Justice Mabeya is further accused of retaining case files for weeks, obstructing appeals, and proceeding with decisions that had already been stayed by higher courts. This obstructive conduct, if verified, is a blatant affront to the hierarchy of courts and the rights of litigants. Such actions reduce the judiciary’s credibility and erode public confidence, leaving citizens vulnerable to the whims of power.

The wider public must recognize the importance of this petition because corruption and incompetence in the judiciary do not exist in isolation. When judges make irregular decisions, businesses collapse, jobs vanish, and communities spiral into poverty. Justice is not a privilege for the wealthy or connected; it is a lifeline for all. Every Kenyan must demand a judiciary that serves the Constitution, not private interests.

It is worth considering what happens when judicial officers go unchallenged. Kenya’s legal history is rife with instances of unchecked judicial power leading to systemic injustices. From land grabbing cases to political prosecutions, the judiciary’s failures have often enabled corruption to thrive. The result is a society where the powerful walk free while the vulnerable are trampled.

Edwin Dande’s petition is, therefore, not just about Justice Mabeya. It is about confronting a larger rot that threatens to destroy the judiciary’s integrity. The petition exposes a culture of contrived decisions and judicial impropriety that must be uprooted. It speaks to a growing concern that some judicial officers are working hand-in-hand with unscrupulous parties to dismantle businesses and plunder assets under the guise of law.

Read Also: The Misuse Of Public Funds In Kenya: A Call For Responsible Governance

Kenya’s judiciary has been hailed in the past as a beacon of hope, particularly after the 2010 Constitution introduced reforms aimed at restoring its independence and efficiency. However, cases like this raise questions about whether those reforms have been undermined. When judges are accused of failing to hear parties, inferring fraud unilaterally, or issuing orders without basis, it signals a judiciary that has failed to reform itself.

Corruption in the judiciary is particularly dangerous because it undermines all other institutions. When courts can no longer be trusted to arbitrate fairly, corruption becomes institutionalized across the government, business, and society. This is why more Kenyans must pay attention to Dande’s petition. It is a litmus test for the JSC and the Judiciary at large: will they protect the system or investigate and act decisively against wrongdoing?

The role of the Judicial Service Commission in this matter is crucial. The Constitution empowers the JSC to discipline and remove judges who violate their oath of office. Edwin Dande’s petition places the JSC in the spotlight, challenging them to demonstrate that no one is above accountability. A failure to act decisively will further embolden errant judges and weaken public trust.

It is also imperative to consider the timing and context of this petition. Kenya is grappling with economic turmoil, high unemployment, and rising poverty. Businesses are already struggling to survive under a heavy tax regime and unstable economic policies. If insolvency courts become sites of injustice, the economic fallout will be catastrophic. This petition is, therefore, not just a legal issue; it is an economic one.

Moreover, the public must ask hard questions about the state of the judiciary beyond this case. Reports of judicial corruption, delayed judgments, and court processes favoring the powerful are becoming more frequent. The judiciary cannot afford to lose its credibility at such a critical time. A compromised judiciary only serves the interests of the corrupt and the powerful, leaving ordinary Kenyans defenseless.

The allegations against Justice Mabeya must also be seen as a rallying cry for all Kenyans to defend justice. Silence in the face of corruption is complicity. If Kenyans want a future where the courts uphold justice, they must demand transparency, accountability, and reforms. The fight against corruption begins by holding those in power accountable—including judges.

The Constitution provides mechanisms for dealing with judicial misconduct, but those mechanisms are only as effective as the will to use them. Edwin Dande’s decision to file this petition demonstrates that citizens have the power to demand accountability. It is a reminder that the judiciary exists to serve the people, not the other way around.

At a broader level, this petition challenges Kenyans to reflect on their role in safeguarding institutions. The judiciary is one of the last lines of defense against corruption and abuse of power. If it falls, the consequences will be dire. This is why Kenyans must rally behind calls for judicial accountability and demand that the JSC act swiftly and fairly.

Dande’s petition also highlights the need for greater public engagement in judicial matters. Justice is not a private affair; it is a public good. The public must follow this case closely, demand transparency in the process, and refuse to let it be swept under the carpet. Corruption thrives in darkness, but accountability flourishes in the light.

In conclusion, Edwin Dande’s petition is a critical moment for Kenya’s judiciary. It is about more than one judge; it is about the integrity of the entire system. For the sake of businesses, livelihoods, and the rule of law, the allegations must be thoroughly investigated. Kenyans cannot afford to look away. Justice must be our shield and defender, and it is up to us to ensure that those entrusted with delivering justice remain faithful to their calling.

Read Also: Should SASRA Be A Department In Central Bank Of Kenya As Focus Shifts Sharply To How They Have Failed To Bring Good Governance In The Sector?