Court of Appeal Judge Katwa Kigen has responded to concerns about his suitability for promotion to the Supreme Court, saying his previous legal work for President William Ruto would not affect his independence as a judge.
Kigen, who was part of Ruto’s defence team at the International Criminal Court and also represented him during the 2022 presidential petition, addressed the issue while appearing before the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) for interviews.
Questions have been raised by some Kenyans over whether he would remain neutral if called upon to hear a presidential election petition involving Ruto in the 2027 elections.
In response, Kigen said his decisions would be based strictly on the law and evidence presented in court.
“It is true I have represented him. I intend to be objective and neutral in my discharge of duties as a judge. I understand the concerns, and I cannot say they are ill-informed, but I want to assure you that I would be fair and guided strictly by facts and the law,” Kigen said.
The concerns were formally submitted to the JSC in a letter dated April 8, 2026. Kigen told the panel he had not seen the document before the interview but had anticipated the issues it raised.
“I must also say I was aware such concerns might arise, which is why I suspected the content of the letter. However, I would have preferred to see it in advance to provide a more structured response,”he added.
He argued that representing clients in the past should not be used against him, noting that many judges had legal careers where they acted for different individuals before joining the bench.
“To suggest that I am at a disadvantage because I represented a particular client would border on discrimination,” he said.
Kigen urged the commission to assess him based on his integrity and commitment to justice, maintaining that he would uphold the law without bias if appointed to the Supreme Court.
He also pointed to legal safeguards such as recusal to manage any potential conflict of interest.
“There are safeguards in place. Where a conflict of interest arises, there are provisions such as recusal. Some presidential petitions have been heard without the full bench of seven judges. Moreover, the Supreme Court’s work goes beyond presidential election disputes,” he said.
“If the concern is significant, recusal remains an available option. For those reasons, I respectfully submit that this issue should not be used to my disadvantage. I am ready to address any specific concerns that may arise,”he added.
The JSC is currently conducting interviews for candidates seeking appointment to the Supreme Court, with integrity, independence and professional conduct among the key considerations.
