Kanjama's comeback: How faith, integrity and grit won in LSK politics

How many times should we dare to try? Perhaps Senior Counsel Charles Njiru Kanjama offers a lesson for those who think of giving up and not making one more attempt when faced with obstacles.

Kanjama, the president-elect of the Law Society of Kenya (LSK), turned the tables to secure a win in what many might call a race of faith and perseverance.

He ran twice. The first time, he faced his classmate Nelson Havi. He discovered that LSK politics can be as fierce as parliamentary politics. Yet he stayed true to his principles, tried again and this time emerged victorious.

The Strathmore University lecturer is a man of principle and a staunch Christian, steadfastly refusing to compromise his integrity for an easier path, a stance that has often been used against him. The word “honest” frequently comes up in conversations about him. Yesterday, he remarked that he would rather miss a flight than bribe a police officer to go about his life.

Kanjama revealed that his previous contest for the same position came as a shock.Envelopes containing as little as Sh1,000 were being exchanged for votes. He had naively believed that the election would be won on leadership qualities and promises to members. Instead, he discovered that even in a learned professional body, money could easily sway hearts and minds, though he ultimately triumphed in this recent election.

Initially, Kanjama funded his campaign largely from his own pocket. From his tone, it was clear he knew that donations in Kenya—especially from politicians—often come with strings attached or future compromises. He later softened his stance on campaign financing, accepting support from colleagues and family acknowledging that LSK elections have become increasingly expensive.

In the just-concluded elections, Kanjama and his two competitors—Mwaura Kabata and Peter Wanyama—revealed that they collectively spent at least Sh23 million on the high-stakes campaigns.

With around 18,000 eligible voters, Kanjama said he spent about Sh6 million, Kabata estimated Sh1 million less, while Wanyama reluctantly disclosed spending around Sh12 million.

“I have many stories about the campaigns. When I decided to vie for LSK President after encouragement from several people, I observed what had happened in previous elections. To be honest, I was both shocked and amused. This business of buying votes has happened before. I was surprised that some young lawyers are offered Sh1,000 or Sh2,000 to vote a certain way,” Kanjama said.

He noted that past elections were often influenced by the “envelope practice,” where lawyers were paid after photographing their ballot papers to prove they had complied with the payer’s demands.

“Because I was concerned about this, I asked my agent, when meeting the IEBC and the elections board, to raise the issue and express concern. I even told him to request a notice warning lawyers not to take photos of their ballots, as some people insist on seeing them,” Kanjama added.

Integrity

Kanjama argued that mid-bar and senior-bar advocates are less susceptible to such influence, but highlighted a worrying trend among the junior bar.  “To those in the senior and mid-bar, you may not see what is happening. The young bar is targeted, especially those just starting out, struggling and who do not see much difference between one leader and another. For them, voting often comes down to, “At least this one has given me something.” That is how the practice spreads,” he said.

He recalled that on voting day, some advocates asked him for “fare” after casting their ballots at Milimani Law Court. (Nairobi polling stations included the Supreme Court, which drew mostly mid-and senior-bar lawyers, while Milimani attracted predominantly junior lawyers.)

Nevertheless, he insisted he stayed away from politicians. “I ensured the money came from my own resources and my law firm. That is a brief illustration on how a lack of integrity can affect even the legal profession. If it starts internally, it eventually affects us externally.” He observed that, in theory, all Kenyans appose corruption when it affects others, but when it involves seeking favours closer to home, it goes unnoticed.

According to Kanjama, the only way to fight it is to draw a clear red line on what one will and will not do—even when everything is at stake. He campaigned on promises of the rule of law, integrity, practice and welfare and engagement—which he dubbed “RIPE.” As managing partner of Muma & Kanjama Advocates, he relies on his reputation for resisting interference. He added that the society needs to move beyond reactive roles, embrace proactive leadership and strengthen relationships. He will serve as LSK president until 2028, a year after Kenya’s general elections.

Kanjama is an arbitrator, accredited mediator, certified accountant and company secretary. He earned his law degree from the University of Nairobi in 2001.

After completing his Kenya School of Law diploma, he joined TripleOKLaw (Ochieng’, Onyango, Kibet & Ohaga Advocates) as a legal assistant and later associate. He subsequently partnered with his former classmate Andrew Muma to establish their law firm.

Kanjama served as the first elected chairman of the LSK Nairobi Branch (2016–2020) and has held positions such as treasurer and chairman of the LSK Branch Chairs Caucus.

With 21 years of experience, his involvement in pro-life advocacy has drawn criticism from groups lobbying for abortion rights. As chair of the Kenya Christian Professionals Forum (KCPF), he has opposed lifting abortion restrictions and challenged proposals such as the Reproductive Health Policy (2022–2032) and the Family Protection Bill (2023).

He insists that he maintains strong working relationships with women and argues that lawyers should not be judged for representing clients in court, especially those promoting family values.

“I know a narrative has been put forward that Kanjama is a religious extremist. I served on the Shakahola task force and we defined extremism objectively: Does your religious practice cause danger to life or health, or violate human rights? I was shocked when someone said they would not vote for me because I am a Christian. I thought, ‘Gosh—are 80 per cent of lawyers not Christians?’” he told a local radio station.

Pro-life advocacy

Kanjama’s past stance on the 2010 Constitution has lingered as a shadow over his career. He initially advised the “No” camp but later shifted his position, even advocating for amendments in a 2011 opinion piece. African feminists and others opposed his candidature over that view. In 2011, he argued that opposition to amendments was insincere, likening it to biblical events involving Moses and Elijah on Mt Sinai and Mt Carmel, referencing the Ten Commandments, the golden calf and confronting idolatry.

“The truth is that the new Constitution is not perfect and can be improved. This should be done through a democratic process. Refusing to amend the Constitution even when necessary implies something beyond respect for the document or veneration for the popular will. It means idolatry. Like Moses and Elijah, we must confront this idolatry and remove it decisively,” he wrote.

He remains connected to his former school, where he serves as an administrator of the Strathmore Education Trust.

“I was good in sciences. For some time, I thought I would pursue a career in the sciences, but there was a paradigm shift in Form Three toward law after considering all options. I do not recall any particular inspiration,” he said.

Kanjama aims to build on Faith Odhiambo’s legacy. He will be deputised by Tess Wavinya Nicholas, succeeding Kabata. He garnered 3,728 votes, with strong support from Nairobi, Central and Mombasa.

“I have a strong agenda and the competence to lead LSK at this critical time as we prepare for the 2027 elections and related rule-of-law challenges; as we plan to put up LSK Justice Towers at Gitanga Road; to reform our CPD Programme; to revise our Advocates Remuneration Order and the Advocates & LSK Act; and to embrace technology and other 21st-Century developments in legal practice,” he said.