Court boycott paralyses business as LSK, Judiciary standoff deepens

 A nationwide court boycott called by the Law Society of Kenya (LSK) on Wednesday paralysed proceedings in several courts across the country, exposing an unprecedented standoff between the Bar and the Bench over allegations of corruption and accountability within the Judiciary.

In retaliation, some advocates claimed they were fined for failing to attend, a move the LSK said would pursue targeted action against the officials.

While some judges and magistrates adjourned matters at the start of the day, others insisted on proceeding with scheduled hearings, setting the stage for dramatic confrontations after LSK leaders descended on court stations to enforce the boycott.

The most dramatic scenes played out at the Milimani Law Courts in Nairobi, where LSK President Charles Kanjama, Vice President Teresia Wavinya, former presidents Nelson Havi and Eric Theuri, alongside other council members, moved from courtroom to courtroom urging judicial officers to suspend proceedings in line with the Society's nationwide directive.

By midday, after addressing the media outside the Supreme Court, the LSK leadership headed to Milimani, where they found several magistrates still hearing matters despite the boycott.

The officials first entered the courtroom of Senior Principal Magistrate Teresia Nyangena, where proceedings were underway despite the absence of most advocates.

Addressing the court, Kanjama said the boycott was intended to protect rather than undermine the administration of justice.

"We did issue a notice that there will be no lawyers attending court today after withdrawing services across the country for various reasons. Most courts at Milimani have heeded our request. We understand this is one of the few courts still proceeding. The administration of justice will not suffer because of one day. We respectfully request the court to adjourn today's matters and ask our colleagues to honour the professional call to withdraw services," Nyangena said.

At the busy Makadara Law Courts, which handles a high volume of criminal cases daily, court operations continued largely as usual despite the Law Society of Kenya (LSK) boycott.

Several advocates appeared in court and represented their clients without interruption. However, some advocates informed the court that they were unable to proceed with their matters in solidarity with the LSK boycott.

These cases were accordingly adjourned and assigned fresh mention dates.

Advocates who spoke to The Standard were unanimous in calling on the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) to implement comprehensive reforms addressing longstanding grievances raised by court users.

They argued that proactive reforms would help avert future boycotts and prevent the accumulation of case backlogs as well as serving justice to the subjects.

The advocates emphasised the need for judicial officers and legal practitioners to work in harmony as a team, with the shared objective of delivering justice, rather than operating in a disjointed and acrimonious manner.

A junior advocate, who preferred to remain anonymous, expressed frustration after being sidelined in a case.

He claimed judicial officers had persuaded his client to drop him with assurances that the matter would be handled favourably without his (advocate) involvement.

The lawyers urged the JSC to adopt an open-door policy that allows counsel to raise concerns freely without fear of victimisation.

They further stressed the importance of clearly defined roles within the justice system. “There are instances where some judicial officers take on the roles of advocate, mediator, and prosecutor simultaneously.

Similarly, counsel cannot assume the functions of the court or the prosecution,” one advocate noted.

Additionally, the advocates called for more extensive cause lists in criminal and duty courts to enable prompt plea-taking and bail applications.

Havi told the court the boycott was aimed at restoring public confidence in the Judiciary.

"We as advocates of Kenya have declared this boycott for one specific good. We want accountability and integrity in the delivery of justice. It may feel uncomfortable to postpone matters, but this action is intended to ensure that justice is administered in an institution that the public trusts," Havi said.

He added that the protest should not be interpreted as an attack on judicial officers.

"For every decision made by a judicial officer, one party leaves satisfied while another leaves dissatisfied. We should not create an environment where every disappointed litigant walks away believing they lost because the court is corrupt. Today's boycott is intended to protect the institution of the Judiciary and strengthen public confidence in it," he said.

John Swakaan an advocate of the High Court acknowledged the Judiciary as one of the strongest arms of government, whose transparent judgments have earned international recognition.

He, however, pointed out that a few rogue elements within the institution occasionally undermine justice.

“The Judiciary is manned by humans. We should give credit where it is due. Where there are failures, let them be rectified through proper reforms rather than finger-pointing, name-calling, or public shaming especially considering that these officers have families,” Swaka said.

Theuri echoed the sentiments, saying the action was meant to support honest judicial officers.

"This protest works to support those judicial officers who faithfully discharge their mandate because a few who fail to uphold integrity spoil the institution for everyone else. We are doing this to protect the Judiciary," Theuri said.

Wavinya appealed to lawyers who had remained in court to show solidarity with colleagues across the country.

"An hour ago I was before another court which has since adjourned proceedings. We are requesting this court to do the same and asking advocates to stand together with the rest of the profession," she said.

In response, Nyangena declined to stand down her cause list, telling the delegation she had received a memo from Chief Justice Martha Koome and Milimani Chief Magistrate Gethi Kibiru directing that court business should proceed as usual despite the boycott.

"Your request has put me at a crossroads because the Law Society is asking me to adjourn the matters, yet I have instructions from the Chief Justice and the Chief Magistrate that court proceedings should continue," she said

Havi, however, dismissed the explanation, saying the LSK leadership had met the Chief Justice in her office that morning but she was unavailable, adding that the Society was "more powerful than the Chief Justice" because it derives its mandate directly from the Constitution and represents advocates across the country. 

The stand-off eventually forced the Director of Public Prosecutions to concede ground.

The DPP did not oppose adjournment of an ongoing hearing against a businessman and two applications by the DCI seeking to continue holding four suspects at Gigiri and Muthaiga police stations, pending completion of investigation , and the matters were stood over until this morning.

The LSK delegation later proceeded to the courtroom of Principal Magistrate Paul Mutai, where proceedings were also halted after both the prosecution and defence sought an adjournment.

"I have considered the sentiments by both parties in this case, and both are for adjournment. I will allow the application," Mutai ruled, closing out the day's business in that courtroom.

Elsewhere across the country, several courts either adjourned matters or experienced disruptions as advocates honoured the boycott.

Earlier in the day, Milimani High Court Justice Margaret Muigai adjourned all matters before her, including the hearing of the murder case facing Ethiopian national Hashim Dagane Muhumed.

Similar adjournments were reported in various court stations as advocates withdrew their services in compliance with the LSK directive.

The Society had instructed advocates to boycott all court proceedings on Wednesday in protest against what it described as growing concerns over judicial accountability, corruption and integrity within the Judiciary.

Addressing the press Kanjama said judges and magistrates are penalising advocates for a stand that was communicated. Kanjama said the Society had received numerous complaints from advocates across the country.  He alleged that some courts ignored the boycott, resulting in adverse orders against both lawyers and their clients.

"We are concerned that in several instances, some judges and judicial officers have failed to comply with the notice that was issued that lawyers would be exercising their constitutional rights," Kanjama said.

He said LSK was compiling reports from affected advocates, warning that the Society would pursue targeted action against judicial officers accused of frustrating the boycott or shielding themselves from accountability.

"We are still receiving information from our members who are being forced to proceed with matters. Some of those matters have been struck out with prejudice. Others have been required to pay adjournment fees. We are compiling a full list," he said.

In a communication to all courts, Kanjama requested judicial officers to adjourn all matters scheduled for hearing and allocate fresh dates without adverse orders on costs or attendance.

"Litigants and other court users should not be prejudiced merely because their advocates are exercising constitutionally protected rights," the letter stated.

The boycott came despite a letter to Kanjama on Tuesday evening from Chief Justice Martha Koome, who urged advocates to reconsider the industrial action.

Koome disputed the LSK's assertion that previous engagements between the Judiciary and the Society had yielded little progress, saying significant reforms had already been implemented, including establishment of Court Integrity Committees, improved registry supervision, enhanced digital services, automation of refunds, strengthening of Bar-Bench Committees and increased use of virtual court proceedings.

She maintained that court proceedings would continue as scheduled, arguing that a boycott would primarily punish litigants rather than judicial officers.

"A court boycott does not principally affect Judges or Judicial Officers. Its immediate impact falls upon litigants and other court users whose matters are scheduled for hearing, mention, ruling or judgment," Koome said.

She further stated that the Law Society had no constitutional or statutory authority to declare a working court day equivalent to a public holiday or direct how courts should conduct proceedings.

The Kenya Judges Welfare Association also criticised the boycott, warning that it risked undermining access to justice and public confidence in the courts.

Association President Justice Mwaniki Gachoka yesterday afternoon said more than 10,000 matters are listed daily before judges and magistrates across the country, representing thousands of litigants awaiting justice.

"We respectfully submit that any concerns the Law Society of Kenya has should be addressed in a way that does not violate the rights of court users to access justice," he said.

Even as the Judiciary and the LSK remained firmly divided over the boycott, Wednesday's events underscored the growing tensions between two institutions whose cooperation remains central to the administration of justice.

With the nationwide boycott now over, attention shifts to the LSK today's move as it implements its planned targeted boycott against individual judges and judicial officers accused of frustrating accountability by obtaining court orders halting investigations or disciplinary proceedings.

The move is expected to further test relations between the Bench and the Bar ahead of the July 31 consultative meeting convened by Chief Justice Koome, where both sides are expected to seek common ground on judicial accountability and reforms while avoiding further disruption to court operations.