Former Law Society of Kenya (LSK) president Nelson Havi has accused Supreme Court judge Isaac Lenaola and his lawyer, James Ochieng Oduol, of attempting to prevent him from publishing documents related to seven petitions challenging the Judicial Service Commission’s (JSC) authority to consider their removal for alleged misconduct.
Havi claims the alleged move, presented to Justices Kariuki, Mugambi, and Mwamuye, amounts to an effort to silence public scrutiny of the petitions.
He says mainstream media have largely avoided covering the case, which he describes as an abuse of judicial process.
Lenaola serves as the patron of the Court Room Reporters Association of Kenya, an association for journalists covering court matters.
The petitions, filed earlier this year, seek the removal of seven Supreme Court judges, including Lenaola, on allegations of gross misconduct and misbehavior.
Under Article 168 of the Constitution, the JSC can investigate and refer judges to a tribunal if credible evidence of misconduct is found.
In his social media statement, Havi said he would publish all documents submitted by Lenaola to accelerate any formal application against him.
He emphasized that he would not be intimidated or silenced, reiterating his commitment to publicizing the court proceedings.
“This is about ensuring transparency in judicial processes,” Havi wrote on X. “Justice Lenaola will not muzzle the publicization of court proceedings or scare me from speaking the truth about him and the judiciary.”
Attempts to reach Justice Lenaola and his lawyer for comment were not successful by the time of publication.
Meanwhile, the JSC has acknowledged receipt of the petitions and is following procedural steps to determine whether the matters warrant further action, including referral to a tribunal for investigation.
The outcome of the case could set precedent for how the media and individuals report on high-profile judicial matters in Kenya.
Havi’s allegations bring attention to the broader question of how Kenya’s judiciary manages transparency and access to information, especially in matters involving senior judges.