A Nairobi-based lawyer, Advocate Adrian Kamotho, has filed a petition in the High Court seeking to suspend the Law Society of Kenya's (LSK) ongoing targeted court boycott. The boycott, which affects Chief Justice Martha Koome, Deputy Chief Justice Philomena Mwilu, and other judicial officers, is challenged for undermining judicial independence and denying access to justice.

Kamotho argues that the LSK's action, initiated through statements and operational guidelines issued in July 2026, sets a harmful precedent by suggesting lawful court orders can be circumvented via boycott. He emphasizes this threatens the rule of law and disrupts the administration of justice.

Details of the Boycott and Legal Challenge

  • The boycott directs lawyers not to appear in fresh hearings, part-heard matters, or new applications before the targeted judges.
  • Advocates are instructed to seek adjournments, transfers, or recusals regardless of client instructions.
  • LSK has threatened disciplinary measures against judges and lawyers who do not comply.
  • The list of affected judges controversially includes the late Supreme Court Judge Mohammed Ibrahim, raising questions about the LSK’s fact-checking.

Kamotho has named the Judicial Service Commission, Chief Justice Koome, Deputy Chief Justice Mwilu, several Supreme Court and High Court judges, and the Kenya Magistrates and Judges Association as interested parties. He seeks conservatory orders to immediately halt the boycott pending the petition’s hearing.

Constitutional and Public Interest Concerns

The petition contends the boycott violates constitutional rights to equality before the law, access to justice, legal representation, and fair hearings, particularly in urgent and criminal cases. Kamotho highlights that litigants, who are not party to the institutional dispute prompting the boycott, suffer undue hardship including adjournments, delayed proceedings, and increased costs.

He further notes that the boycott forces advocates into an untenable position, caught between professional obligations and the LSK’s enforcement threats.

Kamotho stresses that the sought conservatory orders aim to preserve uninterrupted court operations and uphold judicial independence during the legal process.

The petition remains pending before the High Court, with directions and hearing awaited.