An independent judiciary needs ‘credible, effective, and trusted’ accountability mechanisms, says EALS
East Africa Law Society President Ramadhan Abubakar speaks outside the Supreme Court during yesterday's general boycott
Following yesterday’s nationwide boycott of the Kenyan courts by many lawyers in protest of ongoing delays, judicial misconduct, and lack of accountability, the Law Society of Kenya (LSK) is set to continue a targeted boycott of specific judges. The LSK has received support from regional and international groups.
Judicial independence and judicial accountability are not competing principles but complementary constitutional obligations that underpin public confidence in the courts as a guardian of justice and cornerstone of democracy and the rule of law, say the Commonwealth Lawyers Association and the East Africa Law Society.
“The legitimacy of judicial power depends not only on independence from improper interference, but also on public confidence that judicial institutions remain transparent, accountable, and responsive to lawful scrutiny,” said the East Africa Law Society last night, following a day of court boycotts across Kenya. “An independent judiciary is strongest when it operates within a framework where accountability mechanisms are credible, effective, and trusted by the public it serves.”
The East Africa Law Society (EALS) joined the Commonwealth Lawyers Association (CLA), which represents hundreds of thousands of lawyers across 56 nations globally, in support of the Law Society of Kenya (LSK)’s actions and calls for judicial accountability and institutional reform. Yesterday many Kenyan lawyers boycotted courts across Kenya as part of a one-day general boycott called for by the LSK.
From today, the LSK will continue an ongoing targeted boycott against courtrooms of judicial officers the LSK says have protected the judiciary from Judicial Service Commission (JSC) and the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC) investigations into misconduct and corruption allegations against specific officers. The list includes six Supreme Court justices and Chief Justice Martha Koome.
Speaking at a press conference outside the Supreme Court of Kenya yesterday, alongside current LSK President Charles Kanjama SC, several past LSK Presidents and senior members of the Bar, EALS President Ramadhan Abubakar said the legal profession has duties to protect judicial independence from political interference, but also to insist such independence isn’t used as a shield from legitimate scrutiny.
It was a historic coming together of so many LSK Presidents and other senior legal leaders, noted Nelson Havi SC, demonstrating a unity of purpose in fighting incompetence, misconduct and misbehavior by Judges and Magistrates.
Yesterday’s general boycott and the ongoing targetted boycott follows escalating tensions between the LSK and Kenyan judiciary, after at least five consultative meetings over the past two years to address ongoing concerns have in the LSK’s view yielded zero meaningful progress on critical systemic problems, including endemic judicial corruption, registry inefficiencies, and endless case backlogs.
During the course of the general boycott yesterday, Chief Justice Martha Koome issued a statement announcing the immediate suspension and relief of duties for Senior Principal Magistrate Martin Kinyua Mutegi of the Kangema Law Courts, following his arrest by the EACC on allegations of soliciting and receiving a bribe.
“I have consistently stated that Judges, Judicial Officers and members of staff cannot discharge justice with one hand and commit a crime with the other,” said the Chief Justice. “Those entrusted with the administration of justice bear an even greater responsibility to uphold the law and exemplify the integrity they require of others.”
Supporting the LSK’s right to not only engage with the Kenyan judiciary but hold it to account, the CLA reminded “all those in authority in Kenya” of several fundamental principles to create confidence in the justice system, including the requirement for judicial integrity. It urged all parties to continue effective collaboration and dialogue with a view to resolving legitimate concerns and upholding the rule of law.
A strong legal profession does not merely defend institutions, it also helps institutions remain worthy of public trust, said EALS, as it called the LSK boycotts a “lawful, proportionate, and professionally responsible” response to longstanding concerns about corruption allegations, judicial misconduct, delays, registry inefficiencies, electronic filing challenges, and effectiveness of complaint handling.
EALS expressed its solidarity with CLA and LSK calling for meaningful judicial accountability and institutional reform.
“The independence of the judiciary is ultimately strengthened, not weakened, when accountability mechanisms are credible, transparent, and effective.”
