Deputy President Kithure Kindiki and Interior Cabinet Secretary Kipchumba Murkomen have formally demanded access to a complaint lodged with the Law Society of Kenya (LSK) that seeks their removal from the Roll of Advocates.
Through their lawyer, Senior Counsel Cecil Miller, the two top government officials wrote to the LSK requesting official copies of the complaint. Miller stated that his clients learned about the petition through social media reports and now seek clarity on the matter to adequately defend themselves.
“We have been retained to represent the Deputy President H.E. Prof. Kithure Abraham Kindiki and Hon. Onesmus Kipchumba Murkomen with instructions to write to you. Kindly provide us with copies of the complaint…” read part of the letter addressed to the LSK by Miller & Co. Advocates.
The complaint, filed in June 2025 by Nairobi-based lawyer Kepha Ojijo, alleges that both Kindiki and Murkomen engaged in gross professional misconduct and breached the Advocates’ Code of Conduct. Ojijo specifically cited their roles in overseeing state security during the Gen Z-led nationwide protests in 2024 and 2025.
According to Ojijo, the two officials then responsible for powerful security dockets presided over police operations that resulted in the deaths, injuries, and enforced disappearances of young protesters. He argued that such actions were incompatible with the standards expected of members of the legal profession.
The petition has sparked fierce debate within legal and political circles. Critics argue that holding leaders accountable through legal institutions such as the LSK is vital to maintaining the integrity of the profession. However, allies of Kindiki and Murkomen have dismissed the petition as politically motivated and lacking legal merit.
The LSK is yet to publicly comment on the complaint or confirm whether formal proceedings have been initiated. Meanwhile, Kindiki and Murkomen’s legal team has reiterated their clients’ commitment to the rule of law and readiness to respond once furnished with the necessary documents.
If the LSK proceeds with the case, it could set a major precedent on how the legal profession deals with advocates holding high public office and accused of abuse of power.
