Administrative actions v judicial decisions: The drawing line in Supreme Court’s actions

In the wake of the High Court ruling in Law Society of Kenya v Attorney General, a significant question has arisen regarding the distinction between an administrative action and a judicial decision, particularly concerning the Supreme Court's role as the highest court versus the High Court's review powers. The Supreme Court of Kenya barred Senior Counsel Ahmednasir and his employees from appearing before the bench through a letter from the Registrar. Still, the Supreme Court later issued a recusal order, declining to hear submissions from Ahmednasir's Law firm. This article explores the difference between administrative actions and judicial decisions within this case, critiquing the Supreme Court's actions as malicious rather than in good faith. The paper begins with an introduction, followed by an examination of the differences between administrative actions and judicial decisions.

It then discusses the Supreme Court as the highest court in Kenya and the High Court's judicial review jurisdiction, concluding with recommendations on how the Supreme Court should have acted and the potential charges against Senior Counsel Ahmednasir