Allocating Authority over the Algorithm: The Economics of Artificial Intelligence in Kenya’s Justice System

Webinar 33/2026: CoK at 16, and Its Effects on Economic Governance Ahead of the 2027 Elections

Webinar 26/2026: Understanding the Finance Bill 2026: Key Insights and Recommendations

Webinar #18 of 2026: 2026 Index of Economic Freedom: State of Economic Freedoms

Webinar #8:Kenya’s FATF Ratings and the Economic Policy Implications of Illicit Financial Flows

Webinar #6 of 2026: Assessing the Implementation of Kenya’s e-GP System: Policy Options and Reform Priorities

Applying Cost-Effectiveness Analysis to Address Kenya’s Case Backlog Crisis

The persistent case backlog in Kenya’s Judiciary has become both an institutional bottleneck and a broader economic and governance challenge. Despite the constitutional requirement that “justice shall not be delayed,” pending cases reached 649,229 in 2022/23, an increase of 113 percent in seven years. Such delays carry significant economic costs: prolonged contract enforcement, heightened business uncertainty, reduced investor confidence, and higher transaction costs for firms and citizens. These inefficiencies ultimately undermine Kenya’s competitiveness, as reflected in global indices such as the Index of Economic Freedom and the World Bank’s Doing Business reports.

Economically, the Judiciary functions as a vital public good, ensuring rights enforcement, dispute resolution, and the rule of law. Yet, like all publicly funded services, it competes for limited fiscal resources. Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (CEA) provides a transparent framework for evaluating how additional resources translate into improvements in case resolution. Unlike cost-benefit analysis, CEA does not monetise justice; instead, it compares the cost per unit of output, specifically, the cost per case resolved across different interventions.

Webinar#37of2025: Applying Cost-Effectiveness Analysis to Address Kenya’s Case Backlog Crisis

A Law and Economics Review of Kenya’s Pending Bills Policy Issues for FY 2025/2026

Pending bills have become one of the most entrenched weaknesses in Kenya’s public finance system, reflecting fiscal discipline gaps and accountability institutions’ fragility. They arise where government entities receive goods, services, or works but fail to make settlement within the agreed contractual terms, thereby converting ordinary procurement into arrears. Such arrears distort the fiscal position reported on a cash basis, since they remain invisible in headline accounts until eventually cleared. The persistence of pending bills has undermined the principle of budgetary responsibility under Article 201 of the Constitution, which requires that public finances be managed to promote transparency, accountability, and equity.

The continued accumulation of pending bills also raises broader economic and social concerns. Suppliers, particularly small and medium enterprises, are deprived of working capital, which constrains their ability to pay wages, service outstanding debts, and invest in growth. The ripple effects extend to the financial system, where non-performing loans rise as firms fail to honour their obligations. At the macro level, the payment arrears conceal deficits that weaken confidence among investors, creditors, and development partners. Article 227 of the Constitution, which prescribes fairness, equity, transparency, and competitiveness in public procurement, is compromised when the State becomes an unreliable payer. Addressing pending bills should therefore be an imperative for safeguarding constitutional values and restoring trust in Kenya’s fiscal framework.