The attacks directed at the Judiciary pose a threat to the upcoming 2027 General Elections, lobby groups have warned.

The Electoral Law and Governance Institute for Africa (ELGIA) and several other civil society organisations (CSOs) have raised concerns over the sustained criticism of the country’s judicial system, warning that it could impact the credibility of the next elections.

Speaking during a press briefing on Wednesday in Nairobi, ELGIA Executive Director Felix Odhiambo argued that the continued attacks on the Judiciary, if not addressed, would jeopardise the 2027 elections, as the institution is responsible for resolving electoral disputes.

Odhiambo said that the attacks on the Supreme Court, particularly by prominent figures, including state officials, put the fate of the judges at risk, potentially affecting the quorum needed to oversee a presidential petition should the feuds lead to their ousting or resignation.

“Without a full quorum, the Judiciary’s capacity to provide effective oversight during the electoral cycle would be compromised, potentially destabilising the electoral process and weakening a key check and balance that upholds the rule of law,” he said.

He added: “As the court with exclusive jurisdiction over presidential election disputes, it is our view that this is a matter that directly impacts the upcoming electoral preparations.”

This comes against the backdrop of a pending request for an advisory opinion from the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) before the Judiciary, seeking clarification on whether the commission can review the names and boundaries of constituencies and wards after the set timelines have elapsed.

Similarly, the courts are expected to guide the IEBC on whether the constitution allows for an extension of these timelines and whether the electoral body can undertake constituency delimitation and other electoral processes in the absence of commissioners or the requisite quorum.

The briefing was attended by representatives from the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), Transparency International, the Kenya Human Rights Commission (KHRC), and the Elections Observation Group (ELOG).

“This calls for the protection of well-established and strong institutions like the Judiciary, in line with the liberal democracy enshrined in the 2010 Constitution,” said Eric Mukoya of ICJ.

The onslaught against the Judiciary began when senior lawyer Abdullahi Ahmednasir launched a scathing attack on the apex court, accusing some of its judges of corruption and calling for a clean-up within the corridors of justice.

His accusations were later backed by a section of senior lawyers led by former Law Society of Kenya (LSK) President Nelson Havi, who called for Chief Justice Martha Koome’s resignation and a comprehensive overhaul of the Judiciary over allegations of corruption and misconduct.

Senior government officials, including President William Ruto, also joined the fray, further fuelling tensions between the Judiciary and the Executive.

The dispute recently escalated, leading to the withdrawal of security details for Chief Justice Koome and Justice Lawrence Mugambi following the latter’s ruling in a contempt case involving the then-acting Inspector General of Police.

This was widely perceived as an attempt to intimidate and coerce the Judiciary into making decisions that favour the Executive.

“This action sets a dangerous precedent, where constitutional offices can be undermined through external pressure,” Koome warned in a letter addressed to the Ministry of Interior in January after her security was withdrawn.

On Wednesday, the lobby groups condemned these actions, saying they “appear to be part of a concerning pattern to delegitimise the Judiciary.”

“We must guard against the politicisation of accountability processes. When accountability becomes weaponised for political aims, it threatens the very foundation of judicial independence,” said Robert Waweru, KHRC Advisor, calling for vigilance from stakeholders.

These developments prompted the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) to initiate investigations into the allegations after several petitions were filed against some judges.

However, the Judiciary has been temporarily barred from continuing with the investigations following two separate court orders issued by the Nairobi and Narok courts.

In December, the Ombudsman also weighed in, questioning the JSC’s transparency in handling complaints—accusations that the JSC dismissed, stating that the Commission on Administrative Justice (CAJ) had misinterpreted the facts.

ICJ Programme Manager Julie Matheka said that strained relations between the two arms of government could erode public trust in the judicial system.

“A public trust deficit, exacerbated by persistent allegations of bribery against judges and judicial staff, has led to increased attacks on the Judiciary. The net effect of these challenges is that citizens gradually lose trust in the institution,” said Matheka.

She drew parallels between the attacks on the Judiciary and court rulings that have not favoured the State, urging institutions to uphold the rule of law and respect judicial independence.

A recent survey by Infotrak showed that more than half (57 per cent) of Kenyans do not trust the Judiciary.

“Tensions that emerged during the 2017 election nullification have persisted to date. These decisions have led to public attacks and the vilification of the Judiciary for issuing rulings perceived to be against the State,” she stated.

Ms Matheka noted that “judicial overreach” has not only delayed justice but also created “instability by weakening” the Judiciary’s role as an impartial arbiter and eroding its credibility.

While acknowledging that elements of corruption may exist within the judicial system, the lobby groups urged judges to uphold high ethical standards, arguing that they now serve as the last line of defence for the rule of law.