Judge Recuses Herself From Case Involving Fugitive Jailed CEC Charles Kerich

Suspended Nairobi Finance CEC Charles Kerich. [File, Standard]

High Court Judge Roselyne Aburili has recused herself from a petition involving fugitive and suspended Nairobi Finance CEC Charles Kerich who was recently sentenced to three months in jail for contempt of court over a Sh106.7 million debt.

In a ruling delivered yesterday, Justice Aburili disqualified herself from hearing the case challenging Kerich’s eligibility to hold public office after a contempt of court sentence, following concerns raised by the petitioner, city businessman Bryan Yongo, over her alleged impartiality and bias.

"I find no reason to insist on handling this petition where the petitioner is apprehensive that the court might apply the directions given in the Judicial Review matters.... . I therefore recuse myself from hearing this petition," Justice Aburili stated.

The judge directed that Yongo's case be transferred to Lady Justice Patricia Nyaundi for further directions on June 15, 2026.

Yongo's recusal application, filed on June 6, 2026, was anchored on the judge's previous involvement in Judicial Review matters concerning the settlement of long-standing court decree debts owed by Nairobi City County.

He contended that Justice Aburili could not adjudicate the matter impartially because, in March 2025, she issued directions in a lawsuit that pitted Park Towers Limited against Nairobi City County Government, consolidating all cases in which the county was a judgment debtor into a centralized settlement forum under her supervision.

Yongo further contended that Kerich had himself invoked those very directions in his own application seeking to suspend the current jail term, effectively deploying the judge's administrative framework as a shield against criminal enforcement.

Justice Aburili rejected claims suggesting actual bias, noting that she was no longer even sitting in the Judicial Review Division where the disputed directions had been issued.

"The petitioner herein believes that I will not be impartial in this petition. I am no longer in the Judicial Review Division. That is far from the truth," she stated.

The judge defended the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) debt settlement process she had overseen in previous Judicial Review matters as constitutionally grounded and aimed at ensuring successful execution of court decrees.

"Nonetheless, the process initiated by the court is anchored in the Constitution in Article 159 (2) (c) of the Constitution and all decree holders embraced that fruitful process," Justice Aburili said.

She further defended the role played by the court in helping litigants realize the benefits of judgments issued in their favour.

"The court exists to facilitate the process of execution of decrees and orders so that decree holders do not carry barren orders or decrees of the court."

Justice Aburili observed that businessman Yongo was not a party in the earlier Judicial Review proceedings where the Nairobi county government engaged decree holders in structured settlement arrangements.

The judge disclosed that through the alternative dispute resolution process championed by the court, more than 20 decrees had already been settled in the first phase of the process, with more than 70 others earmarked for the second phase, a record she characterised as a meaningful judicial intervention in the longstanding debt crisis afflicting the county.

She emphasized that Yongo's fears were misplaced, particularly because the issues raised in the current constitutional petition differed from those handled in the decree settlement cases.

"The petitioner herein who is not a party to those matters believes that this Court cannot impartially deal with the issues affecting Nairobi County where the Kerich has been held to be in contempt of court in a totally different matters," she said.

Despite dismissing the allegations of bias, Justice Aburili said she would not force herself to continue handling a matter where one of the parties had expressed apprehension regarding her neutrality.

The petition at the centre of the dispute raises constitutional questions under Chapter Six concerning Kerich's fitness to continue holding public office following his sentencing by Justice Francis Gikonyo on May 19, 2026 for continuously failing to honour court orders to pay more than Sh106 million owed to Kwengu & Company Advocates.

Kerich was ordered to serve three months in prison for contempt but has since fled to Dubai, according to court filings.

Kerich's advocates at Okatch and Partners had argued the May 19 sentencing was procedurally irregular, saying both Kerich and his lawyer were logged into the virtual court session when a power outage disrupted their connection, denying them an opportunity to address the court before sentence was passed.

The substantive constitutional questions, including whether  Kerich's can hold on public office in defiance of a committal order violates Chapter Six, and whether Governor Johnson Sakaja and other county officials have failed in their constitutional duties to pay the debt, now fall to Justice Nyaundi to determine.