After two years of restriction, Senior Counsel Ahmednasir Abdullahi has been cleared to resume appearing before the Supreme Court. The decision, delivered on January 23, 2026, restores his ability to represent clients either personally, through his law firm, or via any advocate holding his brief, including in ongoing matters.
Chief Justice Martha Koome, Deputy Chief Justice Philomena Mwilu, and Justice Smokin Wanjala ruled that Ahmednasir and those acting on his instructions may once again appear before the apex court. “It is our determination that Senior Counsel Ahmednasir Abdullahi, an employee of his law firm, any other person holding his brief, or acting pursuant to his instructions, may from the date of this ruling appear and practise before the Supreme Court of Kenya and specifically in respect of the proceedings herein,” the bench said.
The ruling followed an oral application by Senior Counsel Paul Muite and Senior Counsel Fred Ngatia, representing advocates for Nguruman Limited. They argued that the two-year prohibition had served its purpose, allowing sufficient time for reflection and appreciation of the relationship between the judiciary and legal practitioners.
Muite and Ngatia assured the court that Ahmednasir would henceforth engage with judicial decisions in a manner that is respectful and grounded in scholarly debate. Ngatia added that the factors prompting the 2024 sanction were now largely historical, and urged the court not to dwell on past circumstances.
The Attorney General’s office, represented by counsel holding brief, deferred to the court’s judgment, requesting guidance as needed.
The original restriction, imposed in January 2024, followed the Supreme Court’s decision to recuse itself from matters involving Ahmednasir or his firm, citing conduct that undermined its authority and dignity. At the time, the court ruled that Ahmednasir would have no audience before it, whether directly or through other advocates acting on his behalf.
In the 2026 ruling, the Supreme Court acknowledged the gravity of the conduct that led to the initial restriction but noted that two years had passed, giving Ahmednasir sufficient time to reflect. The judges were satisfied with the assurances that he would uphold the dignity and decorum of the judiciary in future engagements.
However, the court emphasized that the 2024 order cannot be vacated, as it arose from separate proceedings that are now concluded. “The order issued on January 23, 2024, cannot be vacated in the present matter as it was made in separate proceedings which have since been concluded,” the bench confirmed.
