Judiciary, MPs Clash Over Judges’ Allowances

Parliament and the Judiciary are locked in a heated dispute over who has the final say on judges’ allowances, with MPs accusing the Judiciary of setting its own rates outside the Salaries and Remuneration Commission (SRC).

The matter came up on Wednesday during a tense Public Accounts Committee (PAC) session at Parliament Buildings, where MPs questioned why the Judiciary continues to pay allowances above SRC-approved rates. Legislators argued that while the Judiciary is independent, it cannot make unchecked financial decisions that burden taxpayers.

“Who regulates these allowances? Who sets the bar?” asked Mathioya MP Edwin Mugo. “SRC usually conducts surveys to guide rates, but who checks the Judiciary if it decides to pay higher figures?”

The clash follows the Auditor-General’s report for the year ending June 30, 2023, which flagged irregular domestic travel and subsistence allowances for top judicial officers. The report said the Judiciary paid higher rates than those set by the SRC in its February 2022 circular.

According to documents tabled before PAC, the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) reviewed allowances in 2019 and introduced a structure that set daily subsistence for the Chief Justice and Deputy Chief Justice at Sh30,000, judges and the Chief Registrar at Sh25,000, and Chief Magistrates, the Deputy Chief Registrar, and other senior staff at Sh20,000.

Chief Registrar of the Judiciary Winfridah Mokaya defended the payments, saying the JSC benchmarked with the Parliamentary Service Commission (PSC). “The rates we apply are comparable to what obtains in the PSC,” she told MPs.

But legislators dismissed the comparison, arguing PSC’s internal perks had already been questioned by SRC. “At what point did you stop following SRC rates, if you ever did?” asked Samburu West MP Naisula Lesuuda.

Mokaya cited Article 172 of the Constitution, which allows the JSC to review terms and conditions of service for judges and judicial officers. She added that JSC set the rates before SRC issued its guidelines, and a court later affirmed the Commission’s position.

Auditor-General officials, however, sided with MPs. Philip Cheboiwo, a director at the Auditor-General’s office, said the Judiciary should not appear to give itself preferential treatment, especially since it already has a representative at the SRC. “If you are part of such a commission, fairness should apply across the public sector,” he said.