The Judiciary courts: Assures Courts Will Remain Open Despite LSK Nationwide Boycott Call

NAIROBI, KENYA — The Judiciary courts remain open LSK boycott standoff has intensified across the country as the administration pushes back against mounting pressure from legal practitioners. Amid a tense climate surrounding the administration of justice, the Judiciary has officially assured all Kenyans that courts nationwide will remain fully operational and that proceedings will proceed strictly as scheduled.

This institutional stance comes in direct response to a nationwide boycott called by the Law Society of Kenya (LSK), which has directed its members to suspend court appearances. As the Judiciary courts remain open LSK boycott debate commands national headlines, litigants and legal observers are watching closely to see how the administrative clash will impact daily court operations and the broader delivery of justice.

Understanding the Roots of the LSK Boycott

The confrontation between the Judiciary and the legal profession stems from persistent grievances regarding operational efficiency, institutional accountability, and systemic challenges within the justice system. The LSK announced its nationwide boycott to protest what it describes as unaddressed administrative bottlenecks, registry inefficiencies, and concerns over judicial accountability.

By instructing advocates to withhold their appearances before specified courts, judges, and judicial officers, the lawyers’ body aims to force immediate structural reforms. However, the institutional leadership has maintained that halting court proceedings inflicts unnecessary delays upon ordinary citizens seeking redress through the courts.

Official Response and the Stand of the Judiciary

In an official statement addressing the crisis, Judiciary Spokesperson Paul Ndemo emphasized that the institution remains steadfast in its constitutional duty to serve the public without interruption. The Judiciary courts remain open LSK boycott directive was met with a clear administrative reminder that closing doors to the public violates the fundamental right of access to justice.

• Uninterrupted Proceedings: All courts across the Republic will remain open and will continue hearing and determining matters as scheduled.
• Protection of Litigants: Institutional leaders warned that the proposed boycott hurts litigants the most by disrupting cases that have already been scheduled for hearing and determination.
• Constitutional Independence: Defending the independence of the bench, the institution cited Article 160 of the Constitution, emphasizing that judges and judicial officers are subject only to the Constitution and the law.

Commitment to Dialogue and Consultation

While firmly resisting the work stoppage, the Judiciary has acknowledged that many of the concerns raised by the LSK require collaborative action. The institution noted that it remains fully committed to resolving administrative disputes through structured dialogue rather than operational standoffs.

Records indicate that the Judiciary has held at least five consultative meetings with the lawyers’ body over the past two years to address challenges affecting the administration of justice. Furthermore, a high-level consultative meeting bringing together the Judicial Service Commission (JSC), the LSK, and representatives of the Senior Counsel Bar has already been scheduled to chart a path forward.

Addressing Accountability and Case Clearances

In the wake of public scrutiny regarding efficiency, the Judiciary pointed to its recent performance metrics as proof of its ongoing commitment to clearing historical backlogs. During the 2024/2025 financial year, courts successfully resolved 647,686 cases against 621,425 new filings, posting a 104 per cent case clearance rate and reducing the national case backlog by 30 per cent.

Regarding specific grievances concerning judicial conduct, the Judiciary urged anyone with formal complaints against judges or judicial officers to channel them through proper statutory mechanisms, specifically the Judicial Service Commission and the Office of the Judiciary Ombudsman. These bodies remain legally mandated to investigate misconduct independently and recommend appropriate disciplinary action.

Navigating the Days Ahead

As stakeholders prepare for the upcoming consultative sessions, the immediate focus remains on whether individual advocates will heed the LSK directive or continue appearing before the bench. With the Judiciary courts remain open LSK boycott impasse forming the centerpiece of legal discussions this week, court registries across major urban centers are bracing for a test of institutional resilience.

Legal experts stress that finding a middle ground between institutional independence and practitioner advocacy will be vital to preserving public confidence in Kenya’s judicial system. For now, court clerks, magistrates, and judges have been directed to report to their stations and ensure that all listed matters proceed as planned. newsportal.co.ke