Kenya LSK Court Boycott: Lawyer Seeks Suspension in High Court

• A city lawyer has filed a petition in the High Court to suspend the Law Society of Kenya's (LSK) targeted court boycott.
• The boycott directs advocates not to participate in fresh hearings or part-heard matters before certain listed judges.
• The LSK's actions have sparked concerns about potential delays and adjournments of cases, which could expose clients to additional expense and denial of access to justice.

The LSK's actions create the impression that lawful court orders can be overturned through a boycott, setting a dangerous precedent to the rule of law and thereby undermining the proper administration of justice.

A city lawyer has taken drastic measures to counter the ongoing court boycott by the Law Society of Kenya (LSK). Advocate Adrian Kamotho has filed a petition in the High Court, seeking conservatory orders to suspend the LSK's targeted boycott of judges and judicial officers. The boycott, which began on July 23, directs advocates not to participate in fresh hearings or part-heard matters before certain listed judges. This move has sparked concerns among lawyers, who fear that the boycott may lead to delays and adjournments of cases, ultimately exposing clients to additional expense and denial of access to justice. The petition names several key parties, including the Judicial Service Commission, Chief Justice Martha Koome, and Deputy Chief Justice Philomena Mwilu, as interested parties in the case.

The LSK's court boycott has raised eyebrows among legal experts, who argue that it undermines judicial independence and sets a dangerous precedent for the rule of law. The targeted list of judges includes several high-profile figures, including Chief Justice Martha Koome and Deputy Chief Justice Philomena Mwilu. However, the inclusion of late Supreme Court Judge Mohammed Ibrahim in the list has been criticized as an example of the LSK's 'unconscionable casualness' in verifying information. The boycott also directs advocates to seek adjournments or transfers of matters before listed judges, regardless of their clients' instructions. This move has sparked concerns about the potential for delays and adjournments of cases, which could ultimately deny litigants access to justice.

The LSK's court boycott has significant implications for the administration of justice in Kenya. The targeted boycott may expose court users to delayed justice and unnecessary hardship, as well as additional expense and denial or delay of access to justice. Lawyers are also at risk of facing disciplinary action if they decline to implement the boycott, which could have serious consequences for their careers. As such, the petition filed by Advocate Kamotho is a crucial step in addressing these concerns and ensuring that the rule of law is upheld.

Lawyers should watch for potential delays and adjournments of cases due to the ongoing targeted boycott, which may expose clients to additional expense and denial or delay of access to justice.

Source: Original reporting via Standard