Where is the LSK going?

4. The objects for which the Society is established are -
a) to maintain and improve the standards of conduct and learning of the legal profession in Kenya;
b) to facilitate the acquisition of legal knowledge by members of the legal profession and others;
c) to assist the Government and the courts in all matters affecting legislation and the administration and practice of the law in Kenya;
d) to represent, protect and assist members of the legal profession in Kenya in respect of conditions of practice and otherwise;
e) to protect and assist the public in Kenya in all matters touching, ancillary or incidental to the law;
f) to acquire, hold, develop and dispose of property, whether movable or immovable, and to derive capital or income therefrom, for all or any of the foregoing objects;
g) to raise or borrow money for all or any of the foregoing objects in such manner and upon such security as may from time to time be determined by the Society;
h) to invest and deal with moneys of the Society not immediately required in such manner as may from time to time be determined by the Society; and
i) to do all such other things as are incidental or conducive to the attainment of all or any of the foregoing objects.

It is campaign season for the Law Society of Kenya. Members of the Society are campaigning to hold positions in the Council, including as Chairman and Vice Chairman. Some have sent representations to other members, making promises which in all likelihood will not be kept. It has been this way for generations and unless someone decides otherwise, it will remain this way for generations to come.

In its heyday, the Society was feared by the Government and respected by the public for the weight of its pronouncements and the insight it offered into the murky world that the legal environment had become. It spoke out against the bastardisation of the Constitution and the abuses of power that the Executive Branch frequently indulged in. It was a stalwart member of civil society and it played a commanding role in bringing about the end of the KANU hegemony, despite several incidences in which, especially, the Moi government managed to infiltrate its ranks with men and women staunchly opposed to the political role the Society was playing.

However, as members of the Society soon realised, the issues that affected the working conditions of advocates in Kenya were frequently placed on the back-burner, playing second fiddle to the politics of the day. When Mwai Kibaki was elected president in 2002, it was hoped by many in the profession that the Society would begin to address these questions, with a view to ensuring that not only the Society flourished, but that it improved in all its aspects, including the working conditions of advocates. The institution of the Continuing Legal Education (CLE) programme was a welcome step in ensuring that the professional standards of advocates remained high and that they continuously acquire new skills and competencies. However, you will be hard-pressed to find an advocate today who does not think that the CLE programme is a means of simply making money for the Society at the expense of practicing advocates. This, and a myriad other issues, must be addressed by the men and women seeking office in the Society.

Many allegations have been levelled at the Council, some dating back to the tenure of Tom Ojienda. They include the fact that some of the financial transactions that the Council has approved have been a way for the members of the Council to line their pockets without direct benefit to the members of the Society. For the first time, the Society approved sitting allowances for members of the Council, which led to the predictable case of the Council scheduling as many meetings as it could get away with without offending the long-suffering members of the Society. Another worrying development was the politicisation of the Council, especially after the advent of the Kibaki administration, with members of the Council taking sides in the aftermath of the disintegration of Kibaki's first administration. The Council today is divided down the middle with some members supporting the PNU/PNU Alliance and others supporting the ODM and its affiliated parties.

The men and women standing for office in the LSK elections of 2012 have failed to address these and other issues afflicting the Society. Indeed, one of the most glaring oversights of the campaigners is their failure to address the direction in which the Society has been led since 2003. It is disturbing that the Society has become so intertwined with government that its objectivity has been compromised., Today, dozens of members of the Society, especially members of the Council, sit in dozens of Commissions and state corporations blinding them to their ills that afflict these organisations. It is time that the Society withdrew from the all-encompassing of the Executive so that it could do its duty and keep an eye on the government, holding it to account. Until these issues are addressed to the satisfaction of the members of the Society, these elections will remain the sham they have been for the past decade. Which one of the candidates will take the bull by the horns and propose a new direction for the Society?