Nelson Havi has drawn public attention to concerns surrounding Josephine Mongare after sharing a detailed post on Facebook discussing issues he says affect the integrity of her court.
Havi, a senior advocate and former president of the Law Society of Kenya, called on fellow lawyers to log into Justice Mongare’s virtual court sessions and ask that she first clear her name with the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission before continuing to preside over cases.
According to him, a judge facing bribery investigations should not be deciding disputes between citizens until such matters are resolved.In the statement, Havi said he has known Justice Mongare since around 2017 through activities linked to the Federation of Women Lawyers Kenya, where she once served as chair.
He explained that he supported the organization financially and also contributed his time during that period, partly because he wanted to understand more about people working within the legal profession.
While he described her as friendly in social settings, Havi claimed she lacked strong depth as an advocate.
He said some individuals who had worked with or trained under her previously described her courtroom practice as below average.
Havi also shared his experiences appearing before her court over the past two years.
He claimed that many of her rulings are short, usually between three and six pages, and in his view do not show a detailed examination of evidence, submissions, statutes, legal books, or previous case law.
According to him, some decisions appear to rely mainly on personal opinion rather than established legal principles.
The relationship between the two reportedly worsened in 2024 after Havi wrote about corruption connected to the killing of a magistrate.
He said that when he later appeared before Justice Mongare, she criticized him for those remarks. Havi said he dismissed the criticism as irrelevant to the case before the court.
After that, he claims he began losing matters before her and was later told by a mutual friend that the judge intended to “teach him a lesson,” a claim that remains his personal account.
One of the cases he referenced involved traders from Gikomba market. Havi said his former clients believed a miscarriage of justice had occurred because of tensions between him and the judge. He said the clients later changed lawyers to someone they believed could better handle the matter in her court.
Havi further alleged that an agent connected to the judge later sought a Ksh 5 million bribe in the case, though he claims the full amount was never delivered and the clients were eventually jailed.
He said that even after the Court of Appeal of Kenya directed that the order be reversed, it was not immediately implemented.
Havi also stated that he filed a complaint before the Judicial Service Commission regarding the judge’s conduct.
He claims she was later cleared after what he believes was outside influence, allegations that have not been confirmed by the commission. He added that he has since filed legal suits involving both Justice Mongare and another High Court judge, Alfred Mabeya.
The advocate also linked the situation to a separate bribery controversy involving former judge Joseph Mutava and former cabinet secretary Raphael Tuju in a property dispute that was reportedly before Justice Mongare’s court. Havi claimed Mutava admitted to collecting money on behalf of the judge, an allegation that remains part of ongoing public debate.
Justice Mongare has previously obtained court orders stopping investigations by the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission, arguing that the actions against her undermine judicial independence and unfairly target her.
Havi, however, says advocates should attend her online court sessions and ask that the corruption concerns be addressed first before proceedings continue.
The claims raised by Havi are serious and remain allegations based on his personal experiences and assertions. They come at a time when discussions about integrity and accountability within Kenya’s judiciary continue to attract public attention.
Havi has argued that judges must remain above suspicion if the justice system is to maintain the confidence of the public.
