NAIROBI, Kenya Dec 24 – The gazettement of procedures of the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) must forthwith be treated as a matter of extreme urgency, the Law Society of Kenya (LSK) said, as it prepares to join appellate proceedings challenging a recent High Court decision.
The statement followed a High Court judgement that indicated that the absence of gazetted regulations for handling complaints against judges rendered ongoing JSC disciplinary proceedings potentially unlawful.
LSK President Faith Odhiambo condemned the ruling, describing it as a “dangerous precedent” that risks paralyzing the JSC’s constitutional mandate to hold judges and judicial officers accountable.
“The Law Society of Kenya disagrees profoundly with the December 18, 2025, ruling by a three-judge High Court bench in HCCHRPET/E110/2025. By effectively suspending the lawful functions of the JSC for lack of gazetted procedural regulations, the Court risks paralyzing constitutional accountability mechanisms,” Odhiambo stated.
The Society further warned that the ruling could embolden judicial officers to stifle accountability under the guise of judicial independence, undermining public confidence in the Judiciary.
LSK noted that the JSC has faced persistent delays in finalizing complaints against judges, and stressed that the Commission must prioritize establishing clear procedures as the new year approaches. The Society confirmed it will join the appellate proceedings to ensure that judicial accountability is upheld.
“LSK will not play audience as such an abysmal standard is set for Kenya’s most consequential public institution under the new Constitutional order. We will take all necessary measures to reverse this decision, and will join the appellate proceedings against it as soon as they commence,”Odhiambo asserted.
The Law Society of Kenya emphasised that the High Court’s decision not only undermines the JSC’s authority but also risks normalising a culture of impunity within the Judiciary.
“We will equally take up immediate corrective steps with the JSC concerning the refusal to put in place the necessary procedures for handling of complaints as ordered by the Supreme Court, which failure jeopardizes the sanctity of the Commission’s solemn constitutional mandate,”said Odhiambo.
The case arose after a complaint was filed with the JSC against Hon. Lady Justice Dorah Chepkwony by an advocate representing an accused person. The complaint concerned alleged administrative misconduct during court proceedings.
While the JSC had begun its preliminary inquiry, the matter was preempted by a constitutional petition in the High Court questioning the Commission’s procedure and jurisdiction.
The High Court held that the absence of gazetted regulations made the JSC’s process procedurally invalid.
LSK, however, contended that constitutional bodies derive their authority directly from the Constitution, and procedural gaps cannot limit their mandate.
“Procedural guidelines enhance transparency, but their absence cannot be invoked to defeat or paralyse constitutional accountability,” Odhiambo said.
LSK further noted that the judgment highlights systemic challenges within the Judiciary and the JSC. The society urged the JSC to prioritize the gazettement of clear procedures for handling complaints, emphasizing that failure to do so undermines public trust and the integrity of judicial oversight.
“The Judiciary cannot expect compliance with its orders when its own institutions fail to implement procedural requirements. We remain steadfast in confronting all forms of impunity and will join the appellate proceedings against this decision,” Odhiambo added.
LSK reaffirmed its commitment to defending judicial independence while insisting that accountability and integrity within the Judiciary are non-negotiable.
“While not all the allegations have been proven nor crystallized into formal complaints, the high calling to the office of Judge or Magistrate cannot sustain or survive even the perception of, let alone implication for breach of duty, lack of integrity, or abuse of office,” Odhiambo stated.
“In the circumstances, the people of Kenya have a legitimate expectation that the JSC performs its constitutional duty to investigate the complaints it has received swiftly, professionally and conclusively,” she added.
JSC Appeal
Earlier, the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) had filed an appeal following a High Court decision suspending all petitions against judges, citing the absence of officially gazetted guidelines for handling complaints against members of the judiciary.
The High Court ruling temporarily halted the processing of complaints and petitions against judges, raising concerns over the mechanism for accountability and oversight within Kenya’s judiciary.
In response, the JSC argued that the decision undermines the constitutional mandate of the commission to receive and process petitions while ensuring transparency and discipline within the judiciary.
“While the Commission respects the authority, role and decisional independence of the courts, it registers its considered dissatisfaction with aspects of the judgment, which, in its assessment, constrain the discharge of the Commission’s constitutional mandate under Article 168,” JSC Secretary Winfridah Mokaya stated.
“The Commission assures the public, the Judiciary and all stakeholders that it remains fully committed to executing its responsibilities with independence, institutional integrity and strict fidelity to the Constitution.”
The commission has now lodged an appeal, urging the Court of Appeal to reinstate its authority to process judicial complaints.
