Of Judiciary and LSK wars: who blinks first?

A legal showdown unfolds as lawyers and the Judiciary clash over accountability and reform. [Courtesy]

Courts all over the country will be grounded on Wednesday after the Law Society of Kenya (LSK) announced a countrywide boycott, in an escalation of the standoff between lawyers and the judiciary.

On the one hand, the LSK council cited persistent graft and misconduct in the judiciary, while on the other, separate sources within the Judicial Service Commission (JSC), the Judiciary and the Kenya Magistrates and Judges Association (KMJA) accused the society of calling the kettle black and withholding crucial information on the grievances they raise.

The council called for a total shun for all judges and magistrates who have sued the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) and the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC). It also unanimously directed its members to file cases in the registries but keep off any hearing of Mentions of cases.

The society targets the Supreme Court, claiming that all other judges, save for Justice Mohamed Warsame, who was recently recruited.

“The targeted court boycott shall extend to all hearings and applications before the Supreme Court of Kenya, save for Registry services. This is necessitated by the fact that all the Judges of the Supreme Court, save for one Judge and the Registrar, currently remain in office by virtue of court orders restraining the Judicial Service Commission from undertaking processes relating to complaints against them,” LSK’s directive reads in part.

However, a JSC commissioner who sought anonymity said that the council has a meeting on July 31, 2026, with the discussions mirroring the same claims raised.

According to the source, the society had met the Chief Justice Martha Koome previously when it was agreed that the then Faith Odhiambo-led council would gather all names of judges and magistrates who are involved in graft and/or gross misconduct and would submit the list to the judiciary’s top leadership and the commission.

The commissioner said that, being a member of the society, Ms Odhiambo sent a circular to all in 2024, but nothing came back.

Further, it emerged that the agreement was to have integrity committees in every court station, with LSK members being part of them. According to the commissioner, the issues raised by the council ought to have been easily dealt with at the grassroots, as per the agreement, and a decision arrived at by the committee would be adopted by the commission.

The commissioner challenged the council to make public or name and shame its members who have been implicated in bribery.

“Ballots are counted at polling stations, so there should be integrity within the station. Faith Odhiambo, she sent a circular for us all to give evidence of corruption they were aware of, as it was sent in Feb 2024. Until today, we don’t have it.”

"Why are they not looking in the mirror? There are the conduits who are lawyers. It is lawyers who tell their clients my fees are Sh200,000 and facilitation is Sh100,000, and they eat all. You can't throw stones while, in fact, for every case of corruption, there is a lawyer?” The commissioner paused.

On the other hand, a KJMA official insisted that its members have a right to be heard, just like any other Kenyans. The official stated that the LSK was a party to the cases filed by the Supreme Court Judges, adding that the association’s position in court was that judges are human beings just as anyone else and that they do not surrender their human rights whenever they take an oath of office.

“To do so would set a dangerous precedent that erodes constitutional protections and undermines the rule of law. Judges, like all citizens, have constitutional rights that are not surrendered upon taking judicial office. It is settled that there is no constitutional violation that the Constitution of Kenya 2010 is incapable of remedying. The Constitution allows the petitioner herein to approach the court whenever any of his rights are infringed upon and/or when threatened with violation,” the official said.

The official cited a long-standing row between senior lawyers Nelson Havi and Allen Gichuhi. According to him, it is ironic for the society to call for a boycott against judges and magistrates while its members were enjoying orders from the same courts, blocking disciplinary cases based on violation of rights.”

“The Constitution has avenues. Why are they holding evidence if they have it, even if they boycott the court? How are agencies created by law supposed to act against whom? What do they want to achieve? Nelson Havi had an issue with Allen Gichuhi; he, too, has a case stopping execution by the High Court. When you start scaring off judges, they are doing it to obtain orders to which they are not entitled,” the official continued...” This is what we call legal goonism.”

According to the official, it would be unfair for a judge or magistrate to be forced by the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) or even the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC) to participate in an illegal process without the court’s intervention.

The LSK statement is an escalation of the differences between LSK and the Judiciary. A Judiciary insider said that Justice Koome introduced a raft of measures to deal with the tension, including meeting with the society’s leadership as the head of the judiciary.

“I can tell you, and you can confirm from Kanjama, the Chief Justice met them four times this year alone, and it was agreed that there should be a split of issues, those that can be dealt with internally by the judiciary’s leadership and those of the Judicial Service Commission,” the insider said.

The statement indicated that the storm was far from over. LSK acknowledged that it had been meeting the CJ, pushing for efficiency, integrity and accountability of the third arm of government.

It, however, decried alleged systematic challenges affecting legal practice, with judicial integrity and corruption being the boiling point.

“Members have expressed concern over allegations of corruption, judicial misconduct, abuse of office and unethical conduct by some judicial officers, which continue to undermine public confidence in the administration of justice. Members have called for prompt, impartial and effective action to address allegations of corruption and misconduct and to uphold the integrity of the Judiciary,” the LSK statement continues to read.

The other thorny issue relates to the delay in hearing and determination of court cases. The society and the Judiciary have been pointing fingers at each other over how slowly the wheels of justice grind.

The LSK blames Judges and Magistrates for adjournments and delays in delivering rulings and judgments.

On the other hand, the Judiciary indicated that lawyers are equally to blame for hearing delays.

The lawyers’ lobby raised 10 issues, including harassment by some judicial officers and disruptions of the electronic filing system.

The council resolved to rally its members for a general and targeted boycott to pressure the Judiciary to heed its members’ concerns. It called for a boycott on July 22, 2026, meaning anyone arrested the previous day who had a dispute, either civil or criminal, on that date would either have to represent themselves or wait for fate.

For the targeted shun, the society directed its members to keep away from any judge or magistrate who has orders against the two commissions until further notice.

“Members have reported instances of discourteous treatment, lack of professional courtesy, and courtroom practices that undermine the role of advocates as officers of the Court. The Society reiterates that mutual respect between the Bench and the Bar is fundamental to the effective administration of justice,” it stated.

The council directed that any judge or judicial officer who is subject to the boycott should not take any new cases or applications. It also indicated that its members should inform them of the guidelines and have their cases transferred to other magistrates or judges.

The council said any pushback would be dealt with, including filing complaints to the JSC. It is composed of Kanjama, who is the President, Teresia Wavinya (Vice-President), Tom K’Opere, Vivienne Eyase, Wanjohi Wambugu (General Membership Representatives), Effie Sheila Achieng, Muthoni Gachara, Wycklife Oyoo (Nairobi Representatives), Hiram Kirimi, Faith Jappann, Hezekiah Aseso, Sharon Oyoko (Upcountry Representatives), Titus Mukanzi (Coast Representative). The directive drew a mixed reaction from the members. There are those opposed and those backing it. Duncan Chebon openly opposed the move on his X account.

“This is absolute nonsense. A remandee who has waited for his case to be heard for a year is going to have to contend with his case being deferred because LSK want to boycott the Judiciary. A day off for Judges with zero results,” said Chebon.

On the other hand, the move was backed by, among others, the Uganda Law Society, which stated that it had also called for a strike from June 26, 2026.

“This action by the LSK echoes our nationwide lawyers’ strike of 26 June 2026, reflecting a growing regional trend of bar associations resorting to collective action in defence of the rule of law and the independence of the legal profession,” the LSK sister lobby said.