NAIROBI, Kenya Jan 12 – The Law Society of Kenya (LSK) has vowed to challenge a far-reaching High Court order issued in Nakuru suspending the engagement of private legal practitioners by public entities, warning that the decision threatens advocates’ livelihoods and risks crippling a crucial sector of Kenya’s economy.
In a statement on Monday, the society’s President Faith Odhiambo said it was shocked by conservatory orders issued on January 12, 2026, by the High Court of Kenya sitting in Nakuru, which temporarily bar all public entities from procuring or continuing to engage private advocates and law firms where in-house government lawyers already exist.
The orders arose from a petition filed under a certificate of urgency by activist Okiya Omtatah Okoiti, Dr Magare Gikenyi J. Benjamin and others against the Council of Governors, the Attorney General and more than 70 public entities.
Under the ruling, public institutions are prohibited from engaging, procuring, continuing to procure or making pending payments to private advocates and law firms. The court further directed the Controller of Budget and all public servants not to approve any funds for external legal services pending the hearing and determination of the petition.
LSK said the decision amounts to an unjustified onslaught on the legal profession and undermines the economic rights of advocates across the country.
“We are shocked by the order of the High Court at Nakuru, which ostensibly deprives advocates nationwide of the opportunity to serve the public,” Faith said, adding that the ruling threatens to destabilise the broader economic ecosystem that depends on professional services.
The lawyers’ body argued that the retention of private practitioners by public entities is lawful, established and expressly provided for under existing legislation, including Section 17 of the Office of the Attorney General Act and Section 16 of the Office of the County Attorney Act.
It further noted that procurement of legal services by public bodies is conducted in strict compliance with the Public Procurement and Asset Disposal Act, while fees payable to advocates are governed by the Advocates Remuneration Order and subject to lawful negotiations and assessment.
According to LSK, the court order has nationwide implications, affecting both national and county governments, state corporations and public agencies, and could disrupt ongoing litigation involving public entities.
“This action threatens to unsettle the entire economic ecosystem anchored on the reliance on competent professionals to support public service,” the society warned, adding that if allowed to stand, it could render public procurement of professional services ineffective.
The petition was heard ex parte in the first instance, with the court directing that all respondents be served within three days and file their responses within seven days. An inter partes hearing has been scheduled for January 30, 2026.
LSK said it would take immediate legal steps to overturn what it termed an “iniquitous decision”, vowing to oppose and defeat the petition and safeguard the independence, dignity and sustainability of the legal profession.
