Two lawyers want bar admission law changed

Two lawyers have petitioned the National Assembly seeking amendment to the Advocates Act of 1989 on the admission of lawyers to the Roll of Advocates.

Brian Onyango and Boru Jattani want Section 15 of the Act amended to allow the Deputy Chief Justice or the senior most judge of the Supreme Court to admit qualified persons to the Roll of Advocates, in the event that the Chief Justice is absent.

The petitioners say, “There is no existing calendar to follow and admission dates have been irregular because the CJ is the only one who decides admissions whenever he feels like.”

REFORM

The duo, who describe themselves as enthusiasts of law reform and legal practice development, are trainees at TripleOKLaw Advocates, are also awaiting admission to the bar.

According to them, qualifying lawyers have been subjected to a long wait when the Chief Justice delays to admit them to the bar because he is the only one who can do it.

They also propose that the period for hearing petitions for admission as advocates be reduced from 90 to 30 days, and that the Chief Justice publishes admission rules.

“The Council of Legal Education Act Cap 16 at Section 22 provided for Advocates (Admission) Regulations. The said Act was repealed by the Legal Education Act, 2011, which did not provide for admission rules or regulation,” the petition reads in part.

SUCCESSION

Their concern come in the wake of the Chief Justice succession debate.

In 2016, when the former CJ Willy Mutunga retired and his deputy Kalpana Rawal was bogged down with issues related to her age, Justice Mohammed Ibrahim, the then Senior Most Judge had no jurisdiction to order admission of advocates, causing delays.

The current CJ David Maraga's term is set to end on or before January 12, 2021 upon attaining the age of 70. But he can also elect to retire before his term ends, to allow for the vetting of his successor, if he so wishes.

“ … in the period preceding the appointment of honourable David Maraga in October 2016, there had been experienced a vacuum with respect to the admission of advocates as the acting President of the Supreme Court declined to admit persons qualified for admission as advocates for want of jurisdiction,” the petition already received by the National Assembly reads.

AMENDMENT

But according to Lawyer Steve Ogolla, “The petition is dead on arrival.” He explained that laws should not be changed for issues of inconveniences, which do not happen every day.

“The purpose of amendment is for the law to be adjusted to match prevailing circumstances, not a one-off problem that might occur once after every five years or 10 years or once in a lifetime,” he said.

He said the better way would be to deal with the problem is to go to the High Court and invoke Article 165 sub section 3 of the constitution to seek an interpretation whether functions of the Chief Justice, not the person, can be transferred to another judge during the temporary incapacitation of the office holder.