Kenya’s Constitution provides strong protections for judicial independence while ensuring that judges remain accountable for their conduct.
Under the Kenyan law, removing a judge from office is not automatic and involves a process governed by Article 168 of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010.
Article 168 establishes legal grounds and procedures for the removal of judges from office.
In 2026, the Judicial Service (Petition for Removal of a Judge) (Procedure) Regulations further clarified how complaints against judges should be handled and how to ensure public participation in judicial oversight.
Constitutional Grounds for Judges Removal
A judge of a superior court may only be removed from office on specific grounds provided under Article 168 of the Constitution.
Among the legal grounds for removal are physical or mental incapacity that prevents the judge from performing official duties.
“A judge may be removed from office only on the grounds of inability to perform the function of office arising from mental or physical incapacity, a breach of a code of conduct prescribed for judges of the superior courts by an Act of Parliament, bankruptcy, incompetence, or gross misconduct or misbehavior,” Article 168 of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010 states.
Further, a judge may be removed for violating the judicial code of conduct prescribed by law, for bankruptcy, for incompetence, or for gross misconduct or misbehavior.
Also Read: Salaries, Allowances and Retirement Benefits for Judges in Kenya
Removal Process
The removal process can be initiated either by the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) or by a member of the public.
Further, the JSC may act on its own motion when it receives information suggesting that a judge may have committed an offense warranting removal from office.
Alternatively, any person can file a written petition with the Commission detailing allegations that fall within the constitutional grounds for removal.
The Judicial Service (Petition for Removal of a Judge) (Procedure) Regulations, 2026 direct that petitions be lodged free of charge.
Once a petition is received, the Judicial Service Commission acts as the first gatekeeper in the process to determine whether the complaint discloses a valid constitutional ground for removal.
Under the 2026 regulations, the Commission is required to establish an investigative panel consisting of at least five members.
Additionally, the panel has authority to receive evidence, summon witnesses, review documents, and investigate the allegations made against the judge.
The judge must also be notified of the accusations and allowed to respond.
If the Commission finds that the allegations disclose a constitutional ground for removal, the matter is forwarded to the President.
Suspension and Appointment of a Tribunal
Upon receiving the petition from the Judicial Service Commission, the President is constitutionally required to act within fourteen days.
The President must suspend the judge from office and appoint a tribunal to investigate the allegations.
However, the suspension is a temporary administrative measure during the investigation with the affected judge receiving half of their remuneration.
Also Read: Judges Hit Back at Lawyers Over Boycott That Included Deceased Judge
Tribunal Investigation and Presidential Action
After being constituted, the tribunal conducts a formal inquiry into the allegations.
During the inquiry period, the tribunal examines evidence, hears witnesses, and determines whether the accusations have been proven.
Upon completing its inquiry, it prepares a report outlining its findings and recommendations that are submitted to the President.
A judge who is dissatisfied with the tribunal’s recommendations may appeal to the Supreme Court within ten days.
Once the President receives the judge removal recommendation, the President cannot immediately act on the tribunal’s recommendations if an appeal is possible.
Action can only be taken after the appeal period has expired or, where an appeal has been filed, all appeal processes have concluded.
Composition of the Tribunal
The Constitution provides different tribunal structures depending on whether the proceedings involve the Chief Justice or another judge.
When the Chief Justice is the subject of removal proceedings, the tribunal comprises the Speaker of the National Assembly as chairperson, three superior court judges from common-law jurisdictions, one advocate of at least fifteen years’ standing and two persons with experience in public affairs.
For other judges, the tribunal consists of a chairperson and three members who are current or former superior court judges, one advocate of at least fifteen years’ standing and two individuals experienced in public affairs.
The composition is intended to ensure independence, professionalism and impartiality throughout the inquiry.
Follow our WhatsApp Channel and X Account for real-time news updates.
