The two decisions made by policymakers in Kenya’s because of COVID-19 were timely but were bound to happen. they are direct economic benefits for reducing the prison population and use of technology in courts. If the Prison population is reduced at least by 10%, the prison population will reduce by 22,372 prisoners. Using the GDP Per Capita as of 2018, we estimate that income gained would be equivalent to Ksh 4.3 billion whereas a 30% prison population reduction would be 67,115 prisoners and equivalent to Ksh 12.9 billion. The mechanism of technology must allow for more accountability.
Kemboi, Leo Kipkogei, Two COVID-19 Lessons that Were Long Overdue to Kenya’s Justice Sector (June 12, 2020).
Available from the SSRN site.
The Law Society of Kenya (LSK) has called for the ending of the monopoly on Bar education in Kenya, following an inquiry into high rates of failure in the Bar examinations. Results from November 2018 revealed that 80 per cent of those who sat the test failed, with only 308 of the 1,572 candidates qualifying. The results led to calls for investigation into the Kenyan School of Law (KSL) which holds a monopoly on bar education in the country.
The exams which are set and marked by the Council for Legal Education (CLE) costs students KES 47,000 (USD455) on average in fees. Reports suggested that there is a lack of clarity over the content of the curriculum compared to the exam, meaning that students may find themselves being required to answer questions on topics they are unfamiliar with, as well as a lack of clarity over the relationship between KSL and CLE. Further information is available here.
The Protocol Establishing the East African Community Common Market, 2010 guarantees free movement of services supplied by nationals of Partner States, and the free movement of services and suppliers who are nationals of the Partner States within the EAC. This implies that the persons supplying services should be able to supply the services to the consumers in other Partner States without discrimination. Cross-border legal practice largely involves an advocate performing legal professional work beyond his or her home state. An advocate can offer legal services outside his or her country where he or she is licensed to practice. This article examines the legal service as a commodity under international trade. By extension, it looks at cross-border legal practice within the EAC Common Market and the challenges to its implementation. It concludes by noting that there is need for the promotion of cross border legal practice in an integrated EAC.
Citation: Lumumba, Fleming Omondi, Free Movement of Services: Challenges to the Implementation of Cross-Border Legal Practice within EAC (November 6, 2017).