Peter Wanyama, a constitutional lawyer with nearly two decades of practice, has returned to the Law Society of Kenya (LSK) presidential race, pitching himself as a litigator with the experience and resolve to defend what he describes as the shrinking practicing space for advocates.
Mr Wanyama, who has practised law for 18 years, says his career has been defined by policy, legislative development and constitutional litigation, particularly in defence of devolution.
For the last 13 years, he estimates that he has filed more than 57 constitutional petitions aimed at strengthening devolved governance.
Kericho Governor Paul Chepkwony (right) with his lawyer, Peter Wanyama, at the Kericho High Court on Thursday after filing a petition in which he is seeking Sh87 billion from KTDA as compensation for small-scale tea farmers in the western rift. He has accused the tea agency of exploiting the farmers.
Photo credit: File | Nation Media Group
“I concentrate in policy and legislative development and constitutional law, where I do intense litigation aimed at strengthening the constitutional law of devolution,” he says.
His new bid comes after an unsuccessful attempt in the previous LSK elections, in which he came second to Ms Faith Odhiambo.
Mr Wanyama says that outcome and the subsequent performance of the council has prompted growing discontent among advocates amid concerns that the council has not addressed practice issues in a manner that the advocates want.
Mr Wanyama adds that he has spent months consulting widely within the profession, engaging with more than 4,000 advocates, in a bid to understand their priorities ahead of the upcoming election.
“They (advocates) said that the next leadership of LSK ought to comprise a president who is very strong in litigation, who understands practice issues and who can do what it takes to protect the practising space, which is increasingly facing significant challenges,” he says.
At the centre of Mr Wanyama’s campaign is what he describes as declining incomes, encroachment by non-lawyers and what he sees as a sustained attack on the image and role of advocates.
“The diminishing working space for lawyers is real. Incomes are not coming into the market. Surveyors are deep in our sector, doing conveyancing. Quacks are everywhere,” he says.
He likens the legal profession to “a jealous lover”, arguing that while the law is meant to be the preserve of advocates, liberalisation has allowed outsiders to erode lawyers’ traditional domains.
“We have people coming in and doing work that is meant for lawyers. So we have to do what it takes to protect our profession,” he states.
Mr Wanyama also criticises what he views as growing hostility towards lawyers in public discourse and judicial decisions that, in his view, undermine access to legal services.
“We, therefore, need a strong Bar led by leadership that is able to explain to Kenyans the mandate of lawyers and also protect practitioners,” he says.
Beyond practice reforms, Mr Wanyama has placed strong emphasis on gender inclusion, arguing that female lawyers have been sidelined in policy discussions within the profession.
“Female lawyers, all the way from pupils to young lawyers to senior lawyers, have been neglected in the policy discussion space. They face a lot of challenges, and they have specifically told me that they want to be at the centre of things,” he says.
He pledges to prioritise gender balance in LSK nominations to boards and institutions, insisting that representation must reflect equality.
“When we are nominating members to boards where LSK is required to be represented, we must have equality. Female lawyers must come in,” he says.
“Female lawyers play a central role in the household economy and in the broader economy, yet we have programmes that don’t target them,” he says.
As part of his manifesto, he proposes specialised and structured continuing professional development programmes tailored for women, including training in emerging areas of practice.
“I want to train at least 200 female lawyers on green financing. We also need lawyers who understand technology and artificial intelligence. We will bring female lawyers on board so that they can acquire knowledge and fill this gap,” he says.
On campaign strategy, Mr Wanyama says his second attempt is built around listening and inclusivity, with particular focus on young advocates struggling to establish themselves.
“The strategy now is to listen to everyone, especially the young bar. I am talking to them. I am telling them to give me a chance to implement new ideas. These are the ideas I have (referring to his manifesto),” he says.
At the same time, he says, his leadership will not neglect mid-level practitioners facing competition from non-lawyers, or sideline senior advocates whose experience he views as critical.
“We will revert to the senior Bar for advice and wisdom, particularly on issues such as judicial reform and engagement with State institutions,” he states.
Mr Wanyama’s proposed approach to government is deliberately confrontational when necessary, but consultative by design.
“The government is always the violator of human rights. It is the government that breaches the Constitution and the law,” he says.
He says that an LSK under his leadership would issue formal legal advisories to government on major policy decisions, while aggressively pursuing public interest litigation where rights are violated.
“Where the government abuses human rights, we will litigate. Under my leadership, LSK will take a strong lead in public interest litigation to protect the concerns of Kenyans,” he states.
If dialogue and litigation fail, Mr Wanyama says society would not shy away from street action.
“We have a right under the Constitution to demonstrate. When we fail behind the scenes, we will come out in public and tell Kenyans we have failed. Then we will organise mass protests.”
On claims that he is close to the current administration, Mr Wanyama dismissed the allegations as propaganda. “That is not true. It’s just part of the propaganda to derail our campaign,” he says.
He cites his litigation history as evidence of independence, including high-profile cases against the national government.
“I handled the Sh10.5 billion Road Maintenance Levy Fund case against the national government. I also have active litigation against the national government on e-procurement,” he says.
He argues that his work for county governments has been aimed at defending devolution, not aligning with the State.
“I have 57 constitutional petitions against the national government to anchor devolution. If that is being pro-system, then they need to understand the context,” he says.
Mr Wanyama insists that he has no political affiliations and no conflicts of interest that would compromise his leadership. “I don’t belong to ODM. I don’t belong to UDA. Advocates want a president who is strong, independent-minded, and will really be independent-minded.”
On matters corruption in the Judiciary, Mr Wanyama promises to engage Chief Justice Martha Koome and the Judicial Service Commission on how to tackle the issue. He says dialogue is the way to go.
As the LSK race gathers pace, Mr Wanyama is positioning himself as a litigator-president, who promises to defend lawyers’ livelihoods fiercely.
