Kenya’s Judiciary marks ten years of Alternative Justice Systems, with a new resolve to ensure that more Kenyans can resolve disputes through accessible, affordable, timely and constitutionally compliant pathways.
By Martin Masai
A dispute over land, a family disagreement or a conflict within a community does not always have to end in a conventional courtroom battle.
Kenya’s Constitution recognises that justice can be delivered through different pathways, including reconciliation, mediation, arbitration and traditional dispute resolution mechanisms.
These alternative pathways are collectively known as Alternative Justice Systems (AJS), and they are the focus of a national Judiciary initiative marking ten years of efforts to make justice more accessible to Kenyans.
The 2026 AJS Service Week, observed from October 26 to 30 under the banner AJS@10, is intended to deepen public understanding and practical use of these mechanisms.
But what exactly is AJS, how does it work, and what does it mean for the ordinary Kenyan seeking justice?
What is Alternative Justice Systems?
AJS refers to alternative forms of resolving disputes recognised under the Constitution and the law.Article 159(2)(c) of the Constitution requires courts and tribunals to promote alternative forms of dispute resolution, including reconciliation, mediation, arbitration and traditional dispute resolution mechanisms.
The idea is to provide people with more than one appropriate avenue for resolving their grievances.
Rather than treating the conventional court process as the only route to justice, AJS recognises the role that communities, traditional mechanisms and other dispute-resolution processes can play in addressing conflicts.
The Judiciary describes this as a multi-door approach to access to justice.
This does not mean abandoning the courts. Instead, it means creating appropriate links between the formal justice system and alternative mechanisms, while ensuring that the outcomes comply with the Constitution and the law.
Why does AJS matter to ordinary Kenyans? Access to justice is not simply about having courts and laws. It is also about whether people can actually use the available justice mechanisms to resolve their disputes.
The Judiciary says the success of AJS will ultimately be measured by whether justice seekers can access appropriate pathways, whether judicial officers routinely identify suitable cases for referral, and whether communities understand and trust the mechanisms.
It also emphasises the need for justice outcomes that are accessible, timely, constitutionally compliant and responsive to people’s needs.
For members of the public, this means knowing that there may be another appropriate avenue to pursue a grievance, rather than assuming that every dispute must follow the same tedious, costly and usually time consuming court process.
The approach also recognises that communities have different justice needs and that locally responsive mechanisms can contribute to resolving disputes.
How did Kenya arrive at AJS@10?The current initiative is the product of a decade of institutional development.
The Judiciary first established the Taskforce on Alternative Justice Systems in 2016. This was followed by the adoption of the Alternative Justice Systems Baseline Policy in 2020 and the establishment of the National Steering Committee for the Implementation of the AJS Policy, known as NaSCI-AJS.
According to Chief Justice Martha Koome, these developments have progressively transformed AJS from a policy aspiration into an increasingly active important component of Kenya’s justice architecture.
Across the country, Court Users Committees have led the development of County Action Plans. AJS mechanisms have been mapped and engaged, while AJS Suites and Ukumbis have been established in a growing number of court stations.
Judicial officers, justice-sector actors and AJS practitioners have also received training, while communities have increasingly participated in shaping locally responsive pathways to justice.
The ten-year milestone is therefore an opportunity to take stock of this progress and consider what needs to happen next.
How does AJS work alongside the courts? One of the central objectives of the 2026 Service Week is to strengthen the practical connection between the courts and alternative justice mechanisms.
The Judiciary wants judicial officers to deliberately review appropriate pending cases and facilitate referrals to AJS mechanisms in accordance with the Constitution, applicable law and the AJS Policy.
This means that the use of AJS is not simply left to communities to organise independently. The formal justice system has a role in identifying suitable matters and facilitating appropriate referrals.
The Service Week brought together courts, AJS practitioners, advocates, justice-sector agencies and members of the public through open days and community dialogues.
These activities are intended to explain available AJS pathways, how they interact with the formal justice system and the minimum constitutional standards that must be observed.
The Chief Justice has written a memo to all courts on AJS. The memo does not provide a detailed list of disputes that qualify for referral or explain the specific referral procedures.
Those are matters that require further public education and guidance.What happened during AJS Service Week? The Service Week was designed as a decentralised national initiative, with each court station expected to develop activities that respond to its particular justice environment.
The Judiciary carried out several activities, including public legal education, community dialogues, training of justice-sector actors, engagement with AJS practitioners and documentation of outcomes.
Court stations also showcased local innovations and success stories, identifying suitable cases for referral and strengthen collaboration between courts and community justice systems.
At the national level, AJS@10 will provide an opportunity to present important tools developed during the decade, including the AJS Case Tracking System, the AJS Benefit Mapping Framework and the Five-Year Report of NaSCI-AJS.
The national activities are intended to complement, rather than replace, the work taking place at individual court stations.
The recognition of alternative justice mechanisms does not mean that every traditional or community-based process automatically qualifies as a lawful means of resolving disputes. Article 159(2)(c) places alternative dispute resolution within the constitutional framework.
The Chief Justice’s memo repeatedly emphasises compliance with the Constitution, applicable law and the AJS Policy.
This is important because public confidence in AJS depends not only on whether disputes are resolved, but also on whether the processes and outcomes meet the required constitutional standards.
The memo does not set out the full range of safeguards or explain how members of the public can challenge an outcome they consider unlawful.
These are among the issues that public education and further guidance need to clarify.
The next frontier is making AJS work.The Judiciary has acknowledged that the next frontier for AJS is not simply developing policies, structures and institutions, but deepening their actual use.
The ten-year milestone provides an opportunity to move from institutional development to practical service delivery.
For The Anchor, the public interest question is whether the ordinary Kenyan will understand the available pathways, know how to access them and have confidence that the process will deliver justice in accordance with the law. Notably, the whole concept of how AJS is to be funded is silent through out the Chief Justice’s memo- notwithstanding the fact that the Judiciary is underfunded.
The success of AJS@10 will ultimately depend on whether the promise of multiple pathways to justice translates into meaningful access for the people who need it most.
Source: Office of the Chief Justice, Internal Memo CJ/223, dated September 14, 2026
Stay Anchored.