By Zuleikha Salim
The recent decision by the High Court to stop the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) from hearing a petition seeking the removal of Court of Appeal Judge Sankale Ole Kantai has sparked wide debate.
It is a story that goes beyond one judge and one petition—it raises big questions about how far our institutions should go in holding judges accountable, while also protecting their independence.
The JSC plays a very important role in Kenya’s justice system. It is the body that recruits judges, hears complaints against them, and can recommend their removal. This power is necessary because the public needs confidence that judges are honest, fair, and beyond reproach.
But at the same time, judges need to be protected from unfair targeting, harassment, or pressure from people who may want to influence their rulings. That balance is not always easy.
In Judge Kantai’s case, petitioners wanted the JSC to hear allegations of misconduct. However, the High Court ruled that the petition could not proceed.
The court said the removal of Judge Sankale ole Kantai over alleged links to Dutch tycoon Tob Cohen’s murder, is an unlawful and premature move.
The court’s decision was based on legal grounds, but it also brings up a deeper issue: should judges be shielded from disciplinary processes once a case has been handled by another institution, or should every complaint be given a full hearing regardless of past outcomes?
Some people may feel that stopping the JSC denies the public a chance to test the truth of the claims against Judge Kantai. Others may see it as a protection of the judge’s rights, since no one should face repeated or unfair investigations over the same matters.
This situation shows us the delicate dance between accountability and independence. Without accountability, corruption and abuse can take root in the judiciary. Without independence, judges may live in fear, unable to make bold decisions that serve justice.
What is needed is clarity in law and procedure. Kenyans must know when and how a judge can face discipline, and judges must trust that the process will be fair, not politically motivated.
That way, the public maintains trust in the system, and the judges can do their work without fear.
The case of Judge Kantai should push us to think harder about reforms in the justice system. It is not only about one man, but about the kind of judiciary we want for Kenya—fair, transparent, and strong enough to stand up for justice no matter who is involved.
