NAIROBI, Kenya – The Judicial Service Commission (JSC) has declined to act on a petition challenging the conduct of its vice chairperson, Isaac Rutto, citing ongoing court proceedings and a parallel review by Parliament that place the matter beyond its constitutional mandate.
In a letter dated February 4, 2026, JSC Secretary Winfridah Mokaya informed the Consumer Federation of Kenya (COFEK) that the Commission could not intervene because the issues raised were already the subject of active legal and parliamentary processes.
“The Commission noted that the matter is currently pending before a court of law and is therefore sub judice. The Commission further observed that a petition has been lodged with the National Assembly pursuant to Article 251 of the Constitution,” the letter reads.
The correspondence, addressed to COFEK Secretary General Stephen Mutoro, was copied to the Chairperson of the JSC, Chief Justice Martha Koome.
COFEK petition
COFEK had petitioned the JSC last week, seeking a review of the conduct of Rutto and fellow commissioner Omwanza Ombati, arguing that their actions could undermine public confidence in the Commission’s impartiality.
In a letter dated January 27, 2026, and addressed to Chief Justice Koome, the federation cited what it described as potential breaches of constitutional and statutory standards governing state officers.
The concerns against Rutto stem from his attendance at a United Democratic Alliance (UDA) National Governing Council meeting at State House, Nairobi, an appearance that reignited debate over the independence of the Judiciary and the propriety of senior judicial officials openly associating with political parties.
The incident sparked sharp reactions online, with critics arguing that such conduct crossed ethical lines and risked eroding public trust in the JSC, particularly at a time when the Commission is actively involved in interviewing and recommending judicial nominees.
COFEK pointed to several constitutional provisions it says may have been implicated, including Articles 10, 73, 75 and 232, as well as the Leadership and Integrity Act and the Public Officer Ethics Act.
“Given the central role of the JSC in safeguarding judicial independence under Article 172, even the appearance of partisan alignment by a Commissioner may undermine public confidence in the Commission’s impartiality,” the federation said.
Concerns over Ombati
COFEK also raised concerns over Commissioner Omwanza Ombati’s role in judicial interviews, citing information suggesting that a sitting Court of Appeal judge may have been treated unfairly during a recent recruitment process.
According to the federation, the alleged adverse treatment may have been linked to a prior judicial decision unfavourable to Ombati, raising questions of bias.
While noting that it does not represent the affected judge and that no formal complaint had been lodged, COFEK said the integrity of the judicial appointments process is a matter of significant public interest.
If substantiated, COFEK argued, such conduct would contravene Articles 47, 50, 73 and 75 of the Constitution, the Judicial Service Act, and the common law principle of nemo judex in causa sua, which underpins judicial recusal standards.
To preserve public trust, the federation urged the JSC to consider whether Ombati should temporarily recuse himself from future judicial interviews pending further review, offering to present supporting evidence if required.
Despite declining to intervene, the JSC’s decision leaves the fate of the petition squarely in the hands of the courts and Parliament, where scrutiny over the conduct of senior judicial officials is now expected to intensify.
