Challenges of Implementing Corporate Governance Practices at the Judicial Service Commission

Abstract

The global financial crisis of 2007 to 2010 where large companies collapsed in many countries, revealed challenges with implementing corporate governance practices and the apparent inability of boards to monitor and control company activities. However, these challenges are not new and for these reasons, corporate governance practices has been subjected to extensive scrutiny, controversy and debate. This study‟s main objective was to establish the CGPs that have been implemented at Kenya‟s JSC, to identify the challenges of implementing CGPs at Kenya‟s JSC and finally determine the mitigation measures that have been put in place to address the challenges of implementing CGPs at Kenya‟s JSC. The study‟s main theoretical anchorage was the Agency theory, and complimented by the Stakeholders and Legitimacy theories respectively. To address the research objectives, the study adopted a case study design and interviewed commissioners of the Judicial Service Commission. The study established that JSC was committed to making wealth declarations for Judicial officer‟s public, public disclosures of judiciary activities and operations, improvement on audit opinions issued by office of the Auditor General and transparency. The study also revealed the implementation of other corporate governance practices such as enhancing commission independence, impartiality and confidentiality. The study further revealed that the challenges facing JSC in implementing CGPs were mainly limited financial resources and political interference. The study recommends that to embed CGPs in the JSC, the entire leadership must make the governance objectives and the primary policy framework aside from administrative responsibilities as outlined in the new Constitution 2010 and the law. Current Governance and policy codes demands positive feedback from Judiciary which promotes efficiency in the Judiciary‟s operations, improved public trust, and improved rule of law and constitutionalism.