Court boycott turns ugly as LSK accuses judges of retaliation

The standoff between the Law Society of Kenya (LSK) and the Judiciary deepened today after the lawyers’ body accused some judges and magistrates of penalising advocates participating in its nationwide court boycott which kicked off this morning, while the Judiciary maintained that court operations continued uninterrupted across the country.

LSK President Charles Kanjama claimed that several judicial officers had forced lawyers to proceed with cases despite the boycott, with some matters allegedly dismissed or struck out with prejudice and advocates ordered to pay adjournment fees.

Speaking during a media briefing, Kanjama said the society had received numerous complaints from advocates across the country whose constitutional rights had been violated after courts ignored prior notice of the industrial action.

“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.

“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, while others have been required to pay adjournment fees. We are compiling a full list.”

Kanjama maintained that the boycott is protected under Articles 37 and 41 of the Constitution, which guarantee the rights to assemble, demonstrate and participate in lawful industrial action.

He warned that LSK would take further action against judicial officers found to have interfered with those rights.

“The Law Society of Kenya reserves and intends to exercise its right to take further action against any judges, judicial officers or any persons who interfere with the right of lawyers to push for judicial accountability and accountability of the entire legal justice system,” he said.

Despite the reported incidents, Kanjama said the boycott had received overwhelming support from advocates across the country, with many lawyers withdrawing their matters from court in line with the society’s directive.

“Many lawyers have heeded the call of the Law Society of Kenya to take out their cases before the courts, and we are gratified that several judges and judicial officers have respected what LSK is doing,” he said.

The LSK president urged advocates to continue observing the nationwide boycott while documenting any incidents through their respective branches and chapter leadership.

He also announced a total boycott of specific courts, including the Supreme Court, saying advocates should not appear before judicial officers targeted by the Society until further notice.

“We are asking every lawyer not to appear in any court that is subject to the targeted court boycott, and that includes the Supreme Court,” Kanjama said, adding that formal notices would be served to the affected judges and magistrates requesting that pending matters be removed from their cause lists.

The nationwide boycott forms part of the LSK’s broader campaign demanding greater transparency, improved judicial accountability and reforms within Kenya’s justice system.

LSK said that judicial independence should not be used as a shield against accountability, particularly in addressing concerns over corruption, case backlogs, registry inefficiencies and delays in delivering judgments.

“Independence should never be used as a shield against accountability,” Kanjama said.

“As we have kept pushing for independence, some members of the Judiciary have used that push for independence as a shield against accountability. They must act in the best interest of Kenyans.”

Former LSK President Faith Odhiambo echoed those sentiments, insisting that judicial independence does not place the institution beyond public scrutiny.

“The independence of the Judiciary does not mean immunity from scrutiny. Even as we boycott today, there is reflection within the Judiciary. They need to sit down and analyse themselves,” she said.

Kanjama also criticised what he termed a reversal of the Judiciary’s commitment to transparency after the Office of the Chief Justice reportedly postponed publication of individual performance data for judges and judicial officers.

According to him, the Judiciary had previously committed to publishing performance indicators for every judge as part of broader accountability reforms.

“One of the measures of accountability that the Judiciary promised the Law Society of Kenya and the public is publication of individual performance data for every judge and judicial officer,” he said.

“We have received communication from the Office of the Chief Justice that they intend to delay that publication because of a case filed a week ago, despite there being no court orders stopping that publication. We strongly deplore this rollback of accountability.”

Looking ahead, Kanjama announced that the LSK leadership, together with members of the Senior Counsel Bar, will meet the Judicial Service Commission on July 31 to present proposals aimed at strengthening accountability within the Judiciary.

“The journey towards accountability of the Judiciary is a journey that must come to the right conclusion where the entire legal justice system is accountable,” he said.

However, the Judiciary has rejected the boycott as an appropriate means of addressing the concerns raised by the legal profession.

In a statement issued this morning, the Judiciary assured the public that court operations remained uninterrupted across all court stations and that judicial officers and staff continued to discharge their constitutional mandate.

“We wish to inform the public that court processes and proceedings continue uninterrupted across all court stations. Judicial officers and staff remain on duty and continue to discharge their constitutional mandate, ensuring that matters scheduled for hearing and other court services proceed as planned,” the statement said.

The Judiciary argued that a boycott of court proceedings primarily prejudices litigants and urged the LSK to pursue its grievances through existing constitutional and statutory mechanisms instead of disrupting court services.

The Kenya Magistrates and Judges Association (KMJA) has also appealed to advocates to reconsider the boycott, warning that withdrawing from court proceedings places the greatest burden on litigants awaiting justice while calling for dialogue through established justice-sector forums.