The Law Society of Kenya (LSK) has declared that its boycott of court proceedings will continue until the Judiciary takes meaningful action to address long-standing concerns over accountability, corruption, judicial misconduct and inefficiencies in the administration of justice.
The lawyers’ body, led by President Charles Kanjama, insists that the industrial action is aimed at restoring public confidence in the justice system rather than undermining judicial independence. LSK argues that repeated engagements with the Judiciary have failed to produce tangible reforms, leaving advocates with no option but to escalate their protest.
The boycott, which began with a nationwide withdrawal from court proceedings, is also expected to continue indefinitely in courts presided over by judges and judicial officers who have obtained court orders blocking investigations by the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) or the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC) into allegations of corruption or misconduct.
LSK’s Key Demands
At the heart of the dispute is the Society’s call for greater judicial accountability. LSK says advocates have consistently raised concerns about allegations of corruption, abuse of office, unethical conduct and weak disciplinary mechanisms for judicial officers.
The Society also cites persistent delays in hearing and determining cases, late delivery of rulings, inefficiencies in court registries and recurring technical challenges affecting the Judiciary’s electronic filing system. According to LSK, these shortcomings have frustrated litigants, undermined advocates’ professional practice and weakened public trust in Kenya’s justice system.
To strengthen accountability, LSK plans to establish a confidential reporting mechanism through which advocates can submit verified complaints on judicial performance, corruption, registry inefficiencies and delays. The information will be used during engagements with the Judiciary and the Judicial Service Commission to push for institutional reforms.
Judiciary Rejects Boycott
The Judiciary has rejected the boycott, maintaining that all courts will remain open and continue operating normally. Judiciary spokesperson Paul Ndemo described the action as an inappropriate response that risks prejudicing litigants whose matters are already scheduled for hearing.
The institution has urged LSK to pursue dialogue instead of disrupting court proceedings, arguing that accountability concerns should be addressed through existing constitutional and administrative mechanisms.
The standoff highlights broader concerns about the efficiency and integrity of Kenya’s justice system. While LSK has reaffirmed its support for judicial independence, it argues that independence must be matched by transparency, integrity and accountability to maintain public confidence in the courts.
As the boycott continues, pressure is mounting on both the Judiciary and the Law Society to find common ground. Whether through dialogue or institutional reforms, the outcome of the dispute is likely to shape future efforts to strengthen accountability within Kenya’s judicial system while safeguarding access to justice for citizens.
