Republic v Attorney General & another (Judicial Review E008 of 2020) [2025] KEELRC 230 (KLR)

The court reasoned that a judgment remains valid and ready for execution for the period prescribed by law, and that provided the judgment is valid it remains ripe for execution, in the case of Government by an application for mandamus. The judgment of the ELRC was appealed and the appeal dismissed on 24/11/2023, with no stay sought. The respondents' reliance on the six-month period for judicial review applications was misconceived because no fresh cause of action arose for limitation purposes; the cause is the enforcement of a subsisting decree.

The respondents argued, relying on Jamal Salim and Samuel Kamau Macharia, that the court lacked jurisdiction because the application was filed outside six months. The court, applying the reasoning in Republic v AG ex parte James Alfred Kosono, held that mandamus to compel a public officer to pay a parliamentary-provided debt is not an execution proceeding against the Government, so the limitation regime for judicial review causes did not defeat the application. The applicants were within their right to move the court to enjoy the fruits of their judgment.

The Court of Appeal judgment of 24/11/2023 was valid and the Respondents were obliged to make good the decree. The applicants obtained the decree and certificate of order against the Government following the Civil Procedure Act. Multiple demands for payment went unanswered. Relying on the Odunga dictum and Article 48 of the Constitution on access to justice, the court held the accounting officer must pay out of funds provided by parliament and issued mandamus against the 1st and 2nd Respondents.