The latest report from the anti-corruption watchdog with this year focuses on the judiciary and Kenya once again suffers an unfavorably prominent standing.

The report alleges that the Kenyan Judges dismissed on allegation of corruption were never given an opportunity to be heard-that in itself is corruption. The good could as well as be swept away with the bad.

The report suggests that the most widespread and persistent problems those who deal with the Kenyan judiciary complain about are political influence over the selection of judges, political interference in rulings (which view is buttressed by headlines such as the recent "CJ tells Michuki off over Mungiki") and finally, the low salaries for officials from the judiciary.

The truly irresponsible manner in which the executive approaches the judiciary was perhaps best captured in an incident not too long ago when gowns donned and gavels at the ready, a group of distinguished lawyers who were poised to be sworn in as judges received a call from State House canceling the event. State House, exercising its constitutional prerogative of appointing judges hastily retreated in holding the swearing in ceremony. No reason was given and likely scant regard was given to the embarrassment or inconvenience caused to the would-be judges. This arbitrary treatment of judicial officials shows how the lack of set structures and standards for appointment of judges contributes to executive control and infringement on the independence and accountability of the Judiciary. It is unlikely that the Executive foresaw that their poor handling of a small case of the disappointed (!) would-be judges event would impact on the country's international image. A local mishap, brushed under the carpet and not even prominent in the national media, has returned now to haunt the government.

The report prescribes the following measures among others to ensure greater judicial independence and accountability:

• That the selection and promotion of members of judiciary be done in an open manner and according to set criteria.
• That the budgets and running of the courts be in the hands of the Judiciary
• Rigorous, fair and transparent disciplinary procedures
• A culture of professionalism in the judiciary
• Clear and fair case assignment procedures
• Increased salaries for court personnel
• An insistence of the continuous education and training of judiciary officials on current jurisprudential trends and applicable law.

The report mentions that in Kenya a common statement in the judicial corridors is "why hire a lawyer, if you can buy a judge" a statement to which I take great exception to as it imputes societal connivance on the part of the Kenyan populace in judicial malfeasance. This is disputed by the fact that the report itself shows clearly that Kenyans (more than half of them anyway) complain bitterly about corruption in the judiciary.

The findings in the report also suggest that one is more likely to offer a bribe (21%) in the African judicial system than in that of any other continent. Latin America comes next with 18% of those who have had to deal with the judiciary having offered bribes.

The report also took a swipe at the capricious and injudicious manner in which the NARC Government implemented its ' Radical Surgery" programme leading to the ouster of former chief Justice Bernard Chunga, the suspensions of 23 Judges and 82 Magistrates. It further made the following, in my opinion, shallow recommendations;

• That a post mortem study be carried out on the impact of the 2003 ‘radical surgery' - we know this will yield no positive outcomes as the architects of the surgery knew the legal implications of their action but chose to ignore them for political ends.
• That the hallowed Ethical Code conduct be invoked in the judiciary to address such issue as corruption, declarations of wealth etc.
• Critical constitutional reforms
• Empowerment of the Judicial service commission, including a recommendation that it be granted power to receive public complaints about misconduct of judicial officials and that it be more involved in vetting judicial appointments and remuneration.
• Better terms of service especially for the magistracy.

Kenyans can take heart in the fact that some steps have been taken to promote judicial performance. It is important however, that the process of judicial reform be continued and the gains made this year in the establishment of a judges Ethics Committee by Chief Justice Gicheru, the GJLOS Programme initiatives, the establishment of Judiciary website, the recently resuscitated publication of Law Reports, review of the Advocates remuneration order and the recent Judiciary open day forum be built upon further. In additions, it is hoped that the recent pay hikes ‘proposals' for the magistracy will be implemented.