Chief Registrar of Judiciary cannot fire judges, apex court rules

When Chief Justice Martha Koome presided over the swearing in ceremony of IEBC commissioners at Supreme Court on July 11, 2025. [Kanyiri Wahito, Standard]

The Chief Registrar of Judiciary (CRJ) has no powers to charge, interdict or sack magistrates and judges, the Supreme Court has ruled.

The apex court said powers to sack or interdict magistrates lie with the Judicial Service Commission (JSC). It said the JSC has also donated those powers to the Chief Justice.

The SC stated this in a ruling against CRJ's decision to interdict and subsequently sack a senior principal magistrate (LMN) who had a case backlog over health issues.

"We agree with the trial court that even with the mistaken assumption that the CRJ is the third in command in the Judiciary's administration hierarchy, there was no authority extended to her by the Judiciary Service Commission (JSC) to charge and interdict the respondent (LMN)," said Chief Justice Martha Koome.

The apex court ordered the reinstatement of LMN after CRJ sacked her in 2016 over delayed judgements and rulings. "Like the courts below, we are persuaded that reinstatement of the respondent to her former position as Senior Principal Magistrate with accrued salary and benefits from the date of interdiction, 22nd August 2016, is what is most just in the unique context of this case," said Justice Koome.

The magistrate LMN was dismissed on August 22, 2016, after the CRJ accused her of failure to deliver 204 judgements and rulings. LMN had told RCJ that she had a health condition hindering delivery of judgements.

However, RCJ said LMN's health was not one of the issues considered at the time of her interdiction. RCJ said the health question was raised for the first time during the disciplinary hearing and that even before her HIV status diagnosis, she had failed to deliver on her duties and that she had introduced her health status to cover her misconduct.

Justices Martha Koome, Smokin Wanjala, Njoki Ndun'gu, Isaack Lenaola and Willis Ouko held that CRJ had no powers to interdict the magistrate and frame charges against her.

The apex court upheld the High Court and Court of Appeal decisions that only the Chief Justice (CJ) holds the initial disciplinary control of judicial officers. The SC also ordered payment of the magistrate's accrued salary and benefits from the date of interdiction. "The respondent is hereby reinstated to her position of Senior Principal Magistrate with accrued salary and benefits from the date of her interdiction, which is August 22, 2016, to date," said Justice Koome.

In the appellate court, Justices Gatembu Kairu, Lesiit Wanjiku and Grace Ngenye said in the circumstances, the action of the CRJ to commence disciplinary proceedings against the respondent was ultra vires and amounted to usurpation of the powers of the CJ.

In the High Court, Justice Stephen Radido said in interdicting the magistrate and framing the charges, CRJ acted ultra vires her constitutional and statutory mandate.