The Kenyan Bar Association has called upon judges confronting substantial corruption charges to withdraw voluntarily or face heightened attention.
In its initial declaration, the newly formed council demonstrated a firm position on judicial responsibility, committing to address professional misconduct.
“Judges confronting significant corruption accusations who secure court orders halting investigations should voluntarily pause their judicial functions until investigations conclude. This represents both a moral obligation and a systemic requirement,” the LSK declaration stated.
To enhance supervision, the council presented four measures, including persistent public focus on judicial probity.
The LSK announced that within 30 days, it will create a confidential system for lawyers to report unethical behavior.
The council indicated it will pursue legal proceedings to ensure accountability and engage in cases where preliminary evidence of judicial malfeasance exists.
The LSK also denounced transferring officials as a remedy for incompetence or corruption.
It has requested the Judiciary to improve transparency by revealing all judicial relocations and their justifications.
Furthermore, the LSK (JSC) to address claims of improper influence in judicial selections and confirm that appointment procedures are based on merit.
“Selection based on merit forms the bedrock of judicial autonomy. Any weakening of the nomination procedure damages public trust in the Judiciary and constitutional administration,” the LSK stated.
The council vowed to continuously observe judicial appointments and improvements, guaranteeing that Kenya’s judicial system maintains its independence, proficiency and responsibility.
This action comes after the 2025 National Gender and Corruption Survey released by the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC) which showed bribery involvement.
While commending recently designated High Court and Environment and Land Court judges, the council voiced apprehension regarding the results. It recognized continuous judicial changes but emphasized that mechanisms must be supported by robust implementation.