A question raised by city lawyer Ahmednasir Abdullahi has placed the spotlight on a practice in Kenyan journalism that rarely attracts public attention: the omission of judges’ names when reporting important court decisions. Read Full Article Here
Ahmednasir questioned why newspapers would report major rulings without clearly identifying the judges who delivered them.
In a post, he argued that readers should be able to know who made the decisions so they can examine the judgments “in context” and form their own views.
His remarks followed a review of two court stories published by Business Daily on page seven of its September 24 edition.
One report concerned a dispute involving Wow Beverages and South African wine maker Namaqua Wines, while another covered an Sh841 million loan dispute between Mauritius Commercial Bank and Jade Petroleum.
The cases involved significant financial claims and detailed legal questions. In the Jade Petroleum matter, the High Court ordered the company to repay Mauritius Commercial Bank $6.5 million, equivalent to about Sh841.7 million, after finding that the bank had honoured guarantees connected to Jade’s borrowing.
The judgment was delivered by Justice Aleem Visram on September 17, 2026. The court dismissed the bank’s claim against three guarantors because the required formal demand had not been proved to have been served.
Ahmednasir’s concern therefore raises a broader question about transparency in reporting judicial decisions: should readers be given the full context, including the identity of the judge responsible for the ruling?
His comments are likely to fuel further discussion about how Kenyan newspapers present court decisions and how much information the public should receive when following significant legal disputes.
About the Author
Discover more from STESHA NEWS
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
