The Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) has called for a revision of Article 146 of the 1992 Constitution, arguing that the existing process for removing Superior Court judges, particularly the Chief Justice, is vulnerable to political manipulation.

In its constitutional review statement issued on Wednesday, September 2, 2026, the IEA said the Constitution did not provide sufficient detail on how removal petitions should be handled.

“The IEA considers the current provisions, particularly those governing the removal of the Chief Justice, too sketchy and susceptible to political manipulation,” the Institute stated.

The Constitution Review Committee, chaired by Professor H. Kwasi Prempeh, proposed a more structured procedure covering the submission of petitions, the preliminary determination of a prima facie case, suspension, the establishment of tribunals and timelines for completing proceedings.

Although the government agrees that the process requires greater clarity and timeliness, it wants the issues addressed through subsidiary legislation or procedural rules under the existing constitutional framework.

The IEA, however, maintained that the safeguards should be incorporated directly into the Constitution.

“Article 146 should therefore be revised to spell out the formal removal procedures in greater detail, drawing on international best practice,” it said.

The Institute cited Article 168 of Kenya’s Constitution, which places an independent Judicial Service Commission in charge of the removal process and provides detailed procedures for handling cases against judges.

It also proposed an intermediate disciplinary system for misconduct that is serious enough to require a formal sanction but does not justify removing a judicial officer from office.

According to the IEA, such reforms would improve transparency, reduce opportunities for political interference and protect the independence of the Judiciary.