Judiciary rejects LSK boycott, says courts will remain open

The Judiciary has dismissed the Law Society of Kenya's (LSK) planned nationwide boycott of court proceedings. Judiciary insists that all courts across the country will operate normally on Wednesday and urging advocates to pursue their grievances through dialogue rather than disrupting the administration of justice. In a statement issued on Monday, Judiciary Spokesperson Paul Ndemo assured litigants and the public that courts would continue hearing and determining cases as scheduled despite the one-day boycott announced by the lawyers' body. "The Judiciary assures the public that all courts throughout the Republic will remain open and will continue hearing and determining matters as scheduled on Wednesday, July 22, 2026," Ndemo said. The Judiciary argued that the planned boycott was neither an appropriate nor proportionate response to the concerns raised by the LSK, warning that the action would primarily disadvantage litigants whose cases are already scheduled for hearing. "The institution does not consider a boycott of court proceedings to be an appropriate or proportionate response to the concerns raised. Such action would primarily prejudice litigants and other court users whose matters are scheduled for hearing and determination," the statement said. The standoff follows the LSK's announcement that advocates across the country would boycott court proceedings on July 22 to protest what it describes as persistent failures in the administration of justice. President William Ruto preside over the swearing-in of 24 Judges of the High Court and 13 Judges of the Environment and Land Court at State House on May 4, 2026. [PCS, Standard] The lawyers' body has cited delays in hearing and determining cases, late delivery of rulings, inefficiencies in court registries, concerns over judicial accountability and the working environment for advocates. LSK President Charles Kanjama said the boycott is intended to push for reforms within the Judiciary but clarified that advocates would continue filing new cases. Matters involving mentions and applications for interim orders would also proceed solely to obtain fresh hearing dates or extend existing interim orders where necessary. The latest dispute comes against the backdrop of growing pressure on the Judiciary to improve efficiency as the number of cases filed in courts continues to rise. Over the years, litigants and lawyers have raised concerns over delayed judgments , frequent adjournments and administrative bottlenecks that have slowed the delivery of justice. However, the Judiciary maintained that responsibility for delays extends beyond the courts, saying data from the 2024/2025 financial year shows that witnesses failing to attend or being unprepared accounted for 16.8 per cent of adjournments, while parties failing to attend contributed 12.3 per cent. Advocates failing to attend or being unprepared accounted for 11.5 per cent, while courts being engaged in official duties contributed 10.9 per cent. Stay informed. Subscribe to our newsletter