Judging the Judges The Struggle for Accountability in Kenya's Judiciary
by admin on | 2025-03-06 09:02:11 Last Updated by admin on 2025-03-28 10:07:47
Share: Facebook | Twitter | Whatsapp | Linkedin Visits: 56
Recent years have seen a significant rise in allegations of criminal misconduct against judges, necessitating the intervention of the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) to enforce appropriate disciplinary measures. Challenges have arisen in defining the JSC’s role in addressing judicial misconduct, particularly in relation to the prosecutorial mandate of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP). This study therefore examines the scope of the JSC’s jurisdiction in handling judicial criminal misconduct and proposes a structured legal framework for its adjudication. Through the analysis of past cases, the study assesses whether the JSC operates within defined limits or exercises broader authority. Moreover, it conducts a comparative analysis of Nigeria’s legal framework to identify best practices that balance judicial discipline with prosecutorial powers. The study ultimately seeks to recommend a procedural model that upholds judicial independence while ensuring accountability, drawing insights from case law and relevant legal literature.
1. Background of the Issue
In recent times, there has been a notable increase in allegations of criminal conduct and serious misconduct against judicial officers. The present Deputy Chief Justice, Philomena Mwilu, was recently accused of involvement in economic crimes, former Deputy Chief Justice, Nancy Baraza, faced allegations of physical assault, Justice Mbalu Mutava faced corruption charges resulting in removal from office, and Justice Philip Tunoi also encountered corruption allegations. These instances of misconduct and criminal behaviour among judges raise significant concerns regarding adherence to ethical and professional standards within the judiciary To uphold and restore public confidence in the judiciary\'s integrity and impartiality, the 2010 Constitution1 established the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) with the authority to discipline or remove judicial officers accused of misconduct. The JSC\'s exercise of this mandate also serves to safeguard and reinforce judicial independence. Adverse decisions against other branches of government may provoke retaliatory actions against judges, particularly from the executive.
