Politics · Other · 14 hrs ago
Court strikes out magistrate’s petition challenging disciplinary proceedings
Kenya’s Employment and Labour Relations Court has struck out a petition by Nairobi Chief Magistrate Stella Atambo.
The case challenged disciplinary proceedings initiated by Chief Justice Martha Koome after two notices asked Atambo to respond to allegations within 14 days.
Atambo said she had not been given the evidence behind the allegations and asked the court to stop further action.
The court did not set out the allegations in its ruling.
Justice Monicah Mbarũ said Atambo should have brought an ordinary employment claim, because the dispute could be handled through standard employment law rather than a constitutional petition.
The court’s decision concerns how the challenge was filed, not whether the disciplinary process was fair.
Atambo’s petition was struck out, and the ruling does not say what happens next in the disciplinary proceedings.
The Employment and Labour Relations Court struck out Chief Magistrate Stella Atambo’s petition seeking to stop disciplinary proceedings initiated by Chief Justice Martha Koome.
Justice Monicah Mbarũ ruled that Atambo should have brought an ordinary employment claim rather than a constitutional petition.
Atambo had challenged two Notices to Show Cause issued on April 10 and 17, 2026.
She said she was asked to respond to allegations without being given the evidence or its source.
The ruling was delivered on October 8, 2026.
- Who
- Chief Magistrate Stella Atambo challenged disciplinary proceedings initiated by Chief Justice Martha Koome.
- What
- The court struck out Atambo’s petition seeking to halt the proceedings.
- When
- The ruling was delivered on October 8, 2026.
- Where
- The case was heard by the Employment and Labour Relations Court in Kenya.
- Why
- The court said the dispute should have been brought as an ordinary employment claim, not a constitutional petition.
Stella Atambo
Chief Justice Martha Koome and the Office of the Chief Justice
Proper procedure
Stella Atambo
Atambo argued that constitutional protections applied from the start of the disciplinary process and that she could seek redress before a decision was made.
Chief Justice Martha Koome and the Office of the Chief Justice
Koome argued that the dispute concerned the fairness of an administrative notice and should not be brought as a constitutional petition.
Disclosure of evidence
Stella Atambo
Atambo said she was required to answer allegations without disclosure of the evidence or its source.
Chief Justice Martha Koome and the Office of the Chief Justice
The ruling did not set out the allegations or state the office’s response to her disclosure complaint.
This is unnecessary. It is not a proper petition.
The petition, premised on the challenged Notices to Show Cause issued by the first respondent against the petitioner and the orders sought, does not raise any need to interpret the Constitution over any rights not provided for under statute.
The complaint is live and continuous. The Petitioner must answer, within fourteen days, allegations framed as fact without disclosure of evidence or provenance. Article 25(c) makes the right to a fair trial non-derogable, and an act that is a nullity is a nullity from inception.
The Office of the Chief Justice issued two Notices to Show Cause to Atambo.
Atambo moved to court to challenge the notices and seek an order stopping further action.
Justice Mbarũ delivered the ruling striking out Atambo’s petition.
- Petitioner
- Chief Magistrate Stella Atambo
- Respondent
- Chief Justice Martha Koome
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Notices to Show Cause
- Issued April 10 and 17, 2026
- Ruling date
- October 8, 2026






