Insults and wrangles in LSK smear the legal profession
What you need to know:
- A few days ago, we witnessed the sad show lawyers put up in their last Kenya Law Society annual general meeting.
- When challenged by Okoa LSK, the Council initially reacted in a non-responsive, even haughty manner.
- Mr Sifuna put on an ugly and distasteful show on TV. He hurled insults at Mr Kanjama, who maintained a demeanour of decorum.
- It is unbelievable how damaging TV tantrums can be, not only to a position but to the whole profession.
Lawyers are called to be the lubricant of social relations in their quest for justice, but have they become the hemlock of society instead?
A few days ago, we witnessed the sad show lawyers put up in their last Kenya Law Society annual general meeting.
Threats, hatred, insults and tribalism were polluting the air, and it all began with a noble idea four years ago.
The bitter troubles in LSK began with the International Arbitration Centre project, which was definitely a great idea.
The LSK received a donation of a piece of land in South C, Nairobi, and for many years members kept requesting the LSK Council to come up with a proposal for developing the land to bring income to the LSK.
The LSK Council decided to set up an Arbitration Centre on that land. This project would come at a time when Kenya is trying to promote alternative means of dispute resolution.
The eventual resolution was to put up a multipurpose building comprising office space for both LSK offices and rental, a hotel, a restaurant and conference facilities.
The idea was noble. Trouble started brewing, as usual, when the critical question of how to finance the project arose. The easy way out was to go for mandatory contributions from members.
This had already happened in the past when the LSK requested Sh5,000 from each member to finance its new offices. The figure proposed this time was many times higher, about Sh40,000, which would have enabled the project to have positive cash flows from the start.
Mandatory contributions cannot be imposed without the approval of members, and such a high figure was bound to trigger controversy.
A special general meeting was called for September 2014 to seek this approval. In this meeting, information did not flow and several members sought to reverse the resolution.
They then formed a team called Okoa LSK to agitate for this.
Both sides lacked the calmness, humility and composure proper to professionals called to be the role models of society. When challenged by Okoa LSK, the Council initially reacted in a non-responsive, even haughty manner.
This elicited a reckless reaction from the Okoa group, who took to making all kinds of half-informed claims and accusations against the project.
Okoa’s legitimate concerns took a turn when their leaders, Edwin Sifuna and Jacqueline Manani, took control of the audience and conducted their own version of the meeting, in which they purported to send the LSK CEO on compulsory leave, approved a five-year forensic audit on the LSK accounts, and resolved to abandon the arbitration centre project.
Naturally, the LSK Council treated these resolutions as a farce and a nullity. Attempts to mediate by several persons, including a group of senior counsel, bore no fruit and the matter ended up in court.
A few days before the September meeting, Okoa LSK went to court to try to stop the AGM. The matter was argued on the Friday before the meeting, but the judge declined to grant what Okoa LSK was asking for.
The meeting took place. It went sour with a clear confrontation between Mr Sifuna and Mr Kanjama, and on Saturday evening both gentlemen were invited to NTV to discuss the matter.
Mr Sifuna put on an ugly and distasteful show on TV. He hurled insults at Mr Kanjama, who maintained a demeanour of decorum. Mr Kanjama’s attitude infuriated Mr Sifuna so much that at the end of the interview, still on air, he called Mr Kanjama a lunatic, and threatened to beat him up.
By then, Okoa LSK, which originally put forth genuine concerns, had lost the battle, and together with Okoa, the whole profession was tarnished.
The atmosphere in LSK relations has become fractured and poisoned, and it seems only the next elections, in February 2016, can resolve the standoff.
It is unbelievable how TV tantrums can be so damaging, not only to a position but to the whole profession.
The arbitration centre is in a frozen state, as various court cases continue touching on the question of mandatory contributions.
I have no doubt that these last episodes will inspire a few fresh lawyer jokes. The legal profession has been smeared by the uncontrolled passions of a few individuals and the pettiness of a bitter fight that could have been resolved in a gentle and civilised manner.
Dr Franceschi is the dean of Strathmore Law School. [email protected], Twitter: @lgfranceschi
