The Law Society of Kenya (LSK) has expressed profound disagreement with a High Court ruling that effectively suspends the Judicial Service Commission’s (JSC) ability to investigate complaints against judges in the absence of gazetted regulations.

In a statement dated December 24, 2025, LSK President Faith Odhiambo announced that the legal body will challenge the decision and take corrective action against the JSC for failing to gazette procedures as ordered by the Supreme Court.

“The Law Society of Kenya 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 stated.

The High Court ruling

The contested judgment was delivered on December 18, 2025, by a three-judge bench comprising Justices Aburili, Chigiti and Muteti in the case of Kennedy Echesa Walubengu v State Law & Another.

The case arose from a complaint lodged with the JSC against Justice Dorah Chepkwony by an advocate representing an accused person appearing before the judge.

After the JSC initiated preliminary inquiry proceedings and scheduled the matter for oral hearing, Justice Chepkwony’s legal team filed a constitutional petition challenging the Commission’s jurisdiction and procedure.

The High Court held that the JSC could not proceed with constitutionally sanctioned processes in the absence of gazetted regulations, finding that such regulations were crucial safeguards for ensuring fair administrative action.

Dangerous precedent

The Law Society of Kenya warned that the High Court has set a dangerous precedent by effectively suspending constitutional functions due to procedural gaps.

“Procedural guidelines are facilitative of and complementary to constitutional functions, and it offends public interest to find that their absence, albeit regrettable and inconvenient, is fatal to constitutional powers,” Odhiambo stated.

LSK emphasised that while procedural gaps should be addressed, they cannot be invoked to defeat or paralyse constitutional accountability mechanisms.

“In the absence of any constitutional or statutory procedure, the JSC has administrative discretion to adopt any fair procedure appropriate to its task,” the statement noted.

Despite disagreeing with the ruling, the Law Society acknowledged that the decision exposes longstanding institutional failures by the JSC.

“The Judiciary cannot, in good conscience, expect that court orders be complied with when an institution led by the Honourable Chief Justice has remained in effective contempt of a Court order,” the statement noted, referring to the JSC’s failure to gazette procedures as ordered by the Supreme Court.

LSK demanded that the gazettement of JSC procedures be treated as a matter of extreme urgency and made a top priority for 2026.

Impunity concerns

The legal body further warned that the High Court’s decision buttresses a worrying trend of judges using court processes to undermine JSC accountability mechanisms.

“It is unacceptable that when members of the public demand for accountability from the Judiciary, the same Judiciary extrapolates the scope of judicial independence to block the legitimate, lawful process of investigation,” Odhiambo stated.

LSK cautioned that unchecked, this trend risks making the judiciary a conduit of impunity that could lose its legitimacy and public goodwill.

“Constitutional bodies derive their authority directly from the Constitution, and the discharge thereof cannot be limited unless to the extent that it is inconsistent with or contravenes the Constitution,” the society argued.

“Neither the Constitution nor the people of Kenya intended that judicial authority and independence be used to make Judges irreproachable gods of their own,” LSK added.