The Judiciary of Kenya has defended the electronic delivery of a ruling by the Court of Appeal of Kenya in a case challenging the appointment of presidential advisors, saying the process followed established procedures adopted to improve efficiency in the justice system.
In a statement issued on Saturday, Judiciary spokesperson Paul Ndemo said the institution was responding to public discussion regarding the circumstances under which the ruling in Attorney General vs. Katiba Institute & 23 Others was delivered.
The case concerns an application seeking a stay of execution of a High Court judgment that had declared the appointment of presidential advisors unconstitutional.
According to the Judiciary, the application was heard by a three-judge bench of the Court of Appeal on February 23, 2026, after which the judges indicated they would retire to consider their decision.
“The application for stay of execution was heard by a three-judge bench of the Court of Appeal on 23rd February 2026,” the statement said.
At the close of the hearing, the court informed the parties that the ruling would be delivered on April 24, 2026, or earlier should the bench reach a decision before that date.
“…we will deliver our ruling on the 24th of April 2026, or earlier on notice,” the bench had indicated.
The Judiciary explained that the bench later finalized its determination earlier than expected, prompting the court to notify lawyers representing the parties about the new delivery date.
On March 12, the Registrar of the Court of Appeal emailed a formal notice to counsel indicating that the ruling would be delivered on March 13 through electronic means.
“On 12th March 2026, the Court, through the Registrar of the Court of Appeal, emailed a Notice of Delivery of Ruling to counsel for the parties,” the statement said.
The Judiciary said the ruling was subsequently transmitted to the lawyers at 12:56 p.m. on Friday, March 13, in accordance with the earlier notification.
“In accordance with that notice, on Friday, 13th March 2026 at 12:56 p.m., the Registrar of the Court of Appeal transmitted the duly delivered ruling to counsel on record for the parties through email,” the statement added.
Ndemo emphasised that the communication was sent to the same email addresses previously used to circulate hearing notices and virtual participation links for the February 23 proceedings.
He noted that all parties had successfully used the same channels during the earlier stage of the case without raising concerns about communication.
The Judiciary further said the electronic delivery of rulings and judgments has been standard practice since 2020 as part of reforms aimed at improving efficiency and ensuring timely access to court decisions.
“This mode of delivery is consistent with the Judiciary’s practice, in place since 2020, of delivering rulings and judgments electronically in order to enhance efficiency and ensure timely access to court decisions by the parties involved.”
The clarification comes amid heightened public and legal interest in the dispute surrounding the appointment of presidential advisors, a matter that has sparked debate over the scope of executive appointments and constitutional limits.