A Kenyan law professor based in US has been
accused of committing perjury in an American court,his co-accused now wants the cases separated.

Makau Mutua, a human and civil rights activist, has been accused of lying in court.

He is sued for allegedly irregularly laying off Jeffrey Malkan, a lecturer at Buffalo Law School where Mutua is a Dean.

Mutua had been charged jointly with Charles P.Ewing but the District Attorney in a new
memorandum filed on August 13, 2014 has now asked that the two cases be separated because Ewing was ‘an innocent bystander’.

“This Memorandum is submitted in support of Defendant Charles P. Ewing’s (“Ewing”) Motion for Separate Trials.

Plaintiff Jeffrey Malkan’s (“Malkan”) claims against Dean Makau Mutua (“Mutua”) should be tried separately to avoid foreseeable “spill-over effect” and indelible prejudice to Ewing, who truly is an innocent bystander to the events that led to Malkan’s 1983 employment claim.

Ewing played no role in Mutua’s decision to non-renew Malkan’s term appointment as Clinical Professor.”

Malkan claims that during Mutua’s testimony in PERB, Mutua lied under oath about the events leading up to his removal as director of LRW.

“Makau Mutua testified to the promotion of tenure committee,which is the entire tenured faculty, that back when I was promoted to full clinical professor on April 28, 2006, that they
voted to terminate my employment on one year’s notice, and that was a lie,” Malkan said.

“He gave his testimony on March 31, and on cross examination by the union attorney on April 1.

This is prepared, premeditated testimony. The dean of the law school went into court and committed perjury.”

In this letter, Malkan alleged: “Makau Mutua gave false testimony under oath pertaining to a material fact in the case,specifically, the faculty’s approval of my reappointment to . ..
the rank of full clinical professor.”

In support of his allegations, Malkan included excerpts of Mutua’s PERB testimony as well as emails he received from former Law School professor Markus Dubber, who attended the CCPR meeting, and former Law School Dean Nils Olsen (“Olsen”), who did not.

“False testimony stains the legal process and the judicial system.

It strips legal legitimacy of their integrity and
undermines their standing in the community by inhibiting their capacity to render justice,” the lawyers say.

“Mutua continues to insist that his recollection of the April 28, 2006, meeting is correct, even after four faculty members in their depositions in this litigation have contradicted his version of events. On December 19, 2013, he categorically maintained under oath that there was no vote on Malkan’s promotion to Clinical Professor and that the only vote that took place was on whether Malkan should be allowed to
continue for an additional year as Director of Research and Writing.”

Mutua testified: “I remember this very clearly.” (Exhibit I: Mutua Dep. 43). To 2 This seems to contradict Mutua’s theory in this litigation that he has the right, absent
recommendation from the CCPR, to non-renew Malkan’s appointment.

To date, no one else who was present at the meeting remembers what Mutua claims to remember “very clearly.”

The case is before the United States District Court in the Western District of New York.

“The African Story as told by Africans”.©African News Digest®