Download PDF - The Judiciary

State of Judiciary 2011-2012
63
management terms, two important changes are pertinent. First,
the Judiciary, as a “separate but co-equal” arm of Government,
now presents its annual budget estimates directly to Parliament.
Second, a Judiciary Fund is created to cater for “administration
and other necessary purposes”. The effect of these two articles
in the Constitution is to secure, for all time, the Judiciary’s financial
independence. These two articles are now firmly embedded in
statute through the Judicial Service Act, 2011. This was the broad
context leading into 2011/12, which was also informed by two key
challenges from the past: resourcing and financing the Judiciary,
and improving Judiciary public financial management. These are
described further below.
6.2.1 Dealing with a historically low resource envelope for the
Judiciary
As recently as 2006/07, the Judiciary’s overall budget was KSh2.1
billion, or approximately 0.5 per cent of the overall National Budget.
More recently, the Task Force on Judicial Reforms noted that “in
the 2009/2010 National Budget, the Executive was allocated 98.2
per cent of the Budget, the National Assembly 1.3 per cent while
the Judiciary was allocated only 0.5 per cent of the budget…
This demonstrates that the Judiciary is grossly underfunded and
under prioritised despite the fact that it is a substantial revenue
earner to the Exchequer”.
This traditionally low funding level for the Judiciary represents a
key catalyst of the continued search for independence; but more
importantly, called for a re-prioritisation of where the Judiciary lies
in Kenya’s overall national development planning and annual
budgeting framework. Figures 6.1 and 6.2 highlight the absolute
and relative funding levels secured by the Judiciary going into
the 2011/12 financial year.